i'm not sure if this is good, bad or neutral?

 

 

 

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad loses CEO

 

 

3:45p.m.

 

Peninsula — The Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad announced today that Doug Cooper will leave after five years as chief executive officer and president.

 

Cooper will return to Forest City Enterprises as a associate general counsel, according to a statement from the excursion railroad. He had represented Forest City before joining the railroad in 2001.

 

The number of riders on the railroad, a popular attraction in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, reached a record 114,000 in 2005.

 

The railroad statement said officials will advertise for a new president and CEO in a few days.

 

They should just proceed with extending it to Tower City, and then put it under RTA management. That would soon kill it, and they they wouldn't need a CEO. :|

Since Cooper was, and will be, rep'ing FCE, you'd like to think this is a good thing w/r regard to moving along w/ the CVSR extension to TC.  Who knows (somebody does, of course), his 'detail' as CVSR head honcho could have been designed to prep for the extension... Wishful thinking? ... maybe.

Doug's tenure at the CVSR has been a good one.  It is, by far, the most successful tourist railroad in Ohio and the region, and that's a credit to his attitude toward marketing the CVSR aggressively and innovatively.  The fact that he will remain local, I think, will mean he can still support the CVSR, as he has many good contacts in the community and among the local leadership.

 

The challenge for the CVSR will be to find someone who can take them to the next step, which means completing the extension into the Flats and continuing to be innovative.

I noticed biking alongside "Thomas the Tank Engine" today in the valley that all the cars had Akron based organizations as listed sponsors.  The main one seems to be Metro- the Akron Metropolitan bus system.  I don't think there's much of a chance of it coming under the aegis of RTA.  However it probably would be a good idea to find someone with Cleveburg roots to head up the CVSR since they're trying to get access to the flats and TC and preferrably someone with pull in this apparent political process.

Akron Metro purchased some of the rail cars a few years from Maryland Rail Commuter (MARC) in anticipation of starting an Akron-based regional rail system. Until they could start the system, they let CVSR use the rail cars. But then the state started gutting ODOT's transit budget (from $40+ million/yr to $16 million this year). Akron Metro suffered from the cuts because it doesn't have a local sales tax funding it like GCRTA does, and the regional rail plans were mothballed.

The Cleveland Planning Commission passed a resolution at their July 21 meeting that sort of addresses this.

http://clevelandplanner.blogspot.com/2006/08/july-21-2006-summary-of-cleveland.html

 

I am completely guessing here, but the move from director to FC council could be percieved as a component toward getting the R/R to TC.

 

Part of the resolution passed reads:

 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Cleveland City Planning Commission:

 

Section 1: That the City of Cleveland hereby embraces the regional vision of connecting Cleveland, Akron and Canton with excursion passenger rail service and supports extending said excursion passenger rail service from its present northern terminus within Cuyahoga Valley National Park at Rockside Road in Independence, Ohio to Downtown Cleveland as alternative transportation to, from and within the Park.

 

Section 2: That the City of Cleveland shall work in concert with the Federal Transit Administration, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Department of Interior, Ohio Department of Transportation, Ohio Rail Development Commission, Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency, consulting parties and other local stakeholders to advance this project and work cooperatively with all parties to plan for and provide the final 8-mile long connection to downtown Cleveland, thus benefiting all residents of the City of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County.

I was wondering whether CVSR can access the Stokes Courthouse building from the Flats level where tracks would, apparently, dead end into the old B&O depot?  This would save a lot of money compared to raising the tracks to the RTA Rapid's level to enter the old Eastern Portal.  As it is projected, the CVSR tracks squeeze (along the parking roadway) btw Stokes and those Sherwin-Williams buildings down there at the crown of the Cuyahoga's Collision Bend.  Once inside Stokes, commuters could access the passageway into Tower City toward Public Square.

 

Others, who opt to move through the old/soon-to-be-revamped headhouse (which, btw, would be an ideal new HQ/nerve center for CVSR operations) could head to Settlers Landing and the RTA Waterfront Line for jobs in the Erieview area which is over a mile away from that location.

From what I understand, it is the intent to use the old B & O RR station as the terminal for the CVSR.  The building is also slated to be re-used as an International Center, which would bring two excellent uses into an historic building.

Great news noozer... what about my idea of linking the cvsr platform to Tower City via Stoke courthouse? ... doable?

A few people might be interested in this....

 

America's national parks will get transit help

THOMAS J. SHEERAN

Associated Press

 

PENINSULA, Ohio - Federal officials awarded 42 grants Monday totaling almost $20 million to reduce traffic in America's national parks and public lands by providing alternative transit including trains, shuttle buses and bicycle trails.

 

The goal of the Alternative Transportation in the Parks and Public Lands program is to reduce pollution and congestion and preserve parklands and wildlife areas while increasing access for visitors, including the disabled.

Has anyone seen what these funds will be used for (I know ... rail upgrades. But rail upgrades to improve existing service? To expand service northward?). I can't find anything specific on the approved grants.

I haven't seen what the grant is for either, but $898,000 isn't anywhere enough to extend service north from Independence to downtown. It's probably enough for preliminary engineering, but that's not what the grant sounded like it was for. CVSR is still trying to negotiate with CSX and NS to cross their tracks that come down the Big Creek Valley and go into the steel mills. That's going to be a toughie, because the crossing is at grade, the CSX and NS freight tracks are long and slow, and there's some serious liability insurance issues involved here. An alternative may be to grade-separate the crossings, but that gets very expensive (something in the $20 million to $40 million neighborhood).

looks like a new rail car and maintenance vehicle.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/summit/1156840832113880.xml&coll=2

 

Cuyahoga Valley railroad receives federal funds $900,000 for rail car, maintenance vehicle

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

April McClellan-Copeland

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Peninsula- The Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad will get $900,000 in federal grants to buy a handicapped-accessible railroad car and a maintenance vehicle.

 

The popular excursion railroad, which runs through the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, also will use some of the money to design new signals and fix rails.

Here the list of projects to be funded, including the Cuyahoga:

 

Alternative Transportation in Parks and Public Lands

Projects Selected for FY 2006 Funding

 

 

Cuyahoga Valley National Park OH National Park Service National Park Service design Prepare design documents to allow for upgrade of railroad signals at grade crossings of Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad. $170,000

Cuyahoga Valley National Park OH National Park Service National Park Service design Develop plans to rehabilitate existing rail in Cuyahoga National Park. $185,000

Cuyahoga Valley National Park OH National Park Service National Park Service maintenance vehicle Purchase a railroad maintenance vehicle to maintain 51 miles of railroad track. $170,000

Cuyahoga Valley National Park OH National Park Service Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad railroad Purchase an additional ADA accessible railcar. $373,000

 

There's a pdf website I ran across a few weeks ago (if I find it, I'll post it) that discussed, in detail, the planned Independence-to-tower city expansion.  What was fascinating was pictures -- that looked fairly recent -- of a cvsr excursion train traveling  around Collision Bend and into downtown, resting near Tower City -- point being, is that track infrastructure apparently exists right now to get the trains into downtown.  Obviously, I'm sure there needs some track upgrades for comfort, speed and safety as well as that messy stuff, like trackage rights, insurance and the like...

^noozer beat me to the punch... Would this funding come entirely through the Nat'l Park Service or would FTA be at all involved since (some of us, anyway) are eyeing cvsr through transit lenses?

^^double Bingo! -- talk about bumping heads/criss-crossing posts thru cyberspace... urbanlife just answered my Q no. 2.  You guys are good.

 

 

KJP:

 

Regarding transit in national parks--- there was a plan in the 1990's to build light rail on the Grand Canyon's South Rim (where 90% of the visitor's go), and ban all auto traffic exept for those who would have stayed inside the park at the lodge, cabins, and campgrounds.  Long story short, the plan was killed within a couple of years after the 1994 GOP congressional win. 

 

Zion National Park has banned all auto traffic (again, except for those staying in the park) and now have buses running every 10 minutes to all of the trail heads and sight seeing stops in the park (during the busy season).  It has been a success. 

 

The last time I was there was in 1992.  I arrived early, took a short hike, and by the time I was done the parking lot where I had parked was overflowing and the traffic was nuts.  I left  the park because I didn't want to be part of the problem.  I would  have loved to have parked my car outside the park and hop on a bus. 

 

Edward Abbey argued in his 1968 book Desert Solitaire that automobile traffic in the national parks should be banned.  Obviously, nobody has ever listened.

Akron Beacon Journal

September 19, 2006

16 groups aboard for rail plan

Scenic tourist railroad wants to roll into Cleveland

 

An agreement was signed on Monday by 16 parties to extend the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad into downtown Cleveland.

 

``We've been chasing this dream for a long time,'' said Doug Cooper, president of the tourist railroad that operates in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park ...

 

... More at http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/15553894.htm

I wish this were moving faster, but at least it's moving.

I wish this were moving faster, but at least it's moving.

 

The longer the delay, the greater the cost.

Odd that the Beacon got this story out and not the Cleveland papers when the ceremony happened in downtown Cleveland in Tower City.  Its nice to see it has everyone's blessing.  I wonder which is going to take longer and cost more:  A railroad or a towpath trail through the flats?

One of the Cleveland papers doesn't come out until tomorrow...

After signing the agreement, the next step will be to establish evidence of widespread community support in Northeast Ohio for the rail extension, Cooper said. After that, public funding will be sought to pay for the extension, he said.

 

Sounds like classic Cleveland hurry-up-&-do-nothing-speak. 

 

No transportation project of any size proceeds quickly, but consider the working group of entities involved in this.  These are all agencies that can seek out and obtain funding to get things done.

 

Sounds like classic Cleveland hurry-up-&-do-nothing-speak. 

 

 

Sounds like a classic clvlndr post! ;)

No transportation project of any size proceeds quickly, but consider the working group of entities involved in this.  These are all agencies that can seek out and obtain funding to get things done.

 

Noozer, I hear what you're saying.  But c'mon: 'establish evidence of widespread community support?’   Hasn’t this already happened?  Cleveland leaders, going back years with RTA, CVSR, Akron Metro RTA, (hopefully soon to be Senator) Sherrod Brown and the Campbell administration, have been on board with this proposal in a rare display of civic unity.  Everybody has supported this project in conjunction with the Towpath expansion into the Flats.  In Akron, Metro expanded CVSR to Canton and the Pro football HOF.  But Cleveland?  We're talking an 8 mile connection over a largely unused/lightly used frieght spur from the perimeter into downtown -- it makes too much sense.  Forget the commuter aspect, there are excellent reasons why the downtown/waterfront of the largest city in NEO should be connected by rail directly to one of the great national parks and tourist areas -- I've heard nothing but hearty support.  But this new language smacks of the typical approach to any type of rail transit expansion in Greater Cleveland -- study it to death until the (relatively small band of) rail advocates lose steam, the general public loses interest and money dries up.

All of the planning/studying being discussed is what the National Environmental Policy Act requires for proposed transportation projects to become eligible for federal funding. And there is federal funding available for the CVSR extension -- up to $75 million per year through the new Transit in the Parks program at the FTA. Studies suck, I'll grant you. But until someone amends the NEPA process, they're an ugly fact of life.

Perhaps with ODOT helping them in the study they can design a dusey of a bridge from TC down the flats so that Lolly the trolley can get down there and move along all the way to meet the train in Independence.

CVSR is chugging toward downtown

By Ken Prendergast, Staff Writer

The Sun News

Sept. 21, 2006

 

Sixteen Northeast Ohio organizations agreed this week to support the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad's proposed extension of its excursion train route north to downtown Cleveland.

 

Representatives of each organization signed a memorandum of understanding during a ceremony Monday at Tower City Center, held in conjunction with the triennial "Canal Adventure" ...

 

... More at http://www.sunnews.com/news/2006/part2/0921/ACTRAIN.htm

 

 

The full article wasn't on Cleveland.com? Our Sunnews.com site never posts full articles.

Sorry, KJP ... I couldn't find it on the PD site.

Uh oh, there's that word "chugging" again. Better not let BuckeyeB see that. ;)

I hate the word "chugging" too. While I don't write headlines, after that use of the word atop my article, maybe I SHOULD write them!

Too late!!! I SAW that!!  :whip: Chug THIS!! :drunk:

Sixteen Northeast Ohio organizations agreed this week to support the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad's proposed extension of its excursion train route north to downtown Cleveland.

 

Well, sounds like the 'widespread community support' is well in hand -- I'm hoping the ABJ was simply mistaken on this issue.  I'm well aware of the usual FTA studies that must be undertaken, including environmental impact (though I seriously wonder how this could be a major issue given the proposed 8-mile extension would, no doubt, traverse more brownfields then you can shake a stick it -- it's the industrial core of the region.  But maybe this new Fed parks transit funding program won't have as many obstacles as the old FTA, but I may be wrong.

I wonder if Steelyard and "The Avenue at Tower City" will market this river valley scienic railroad

CVSR chugs toward downtown extension

By Ken Prendergast

The Sun Courier

Thursday, September 28, 2006

 

Sixteen Northeast Ohio organizations agreed this week to support the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad's proposed extension of its excursion train route north to downtown Cleveland.

 

Representatives of each organization signed a memorandum of understanding during a ceremony Monday at Tower City Center, held in conjunction with the triennial Canal Adventure ...

 

... More at http://www.cleveland.com/sun/suncourier/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1159462274246930.xml&coll=3

 

While the city of Cleveland wasn't a signatory, Mayor Frank Jackson sent a letter of support for the CVSR extension. Also sending a letter of support was Greater Cleveland Partnership president Joe Roman. A spokesperson for Jackson said he didn't sign the memorandum because of staff concerns about CVSR having access to public rights of ways that could conflict with other proposed projects. He wouldn't elaborate on the projects, however.

 

 

very cryptic. would that be conflicting with other rail projects on the burner?....or more mundane highway and roadwork stuff?

 

kjp you left us hanging with that one. any insight or suspicions as to what kept the mayor from signing on? what's he got up his sleeve re these mysterious unnamed projects?

 

From what I know of the situation, there actually are some legitimate concerns over access right over the CSX railroad.  That the sort of thing that must be worked out if the CVSR takes this plan into the Environmental Impact Study phase, which I believe will be required if any federal dollars are involved.

 

That's not to say such access rights are insurmountable.  It's just that Mayor Jackson is probably right exercising a bit of caution.  It's up to the CVSR to find a solution and move the idea forward.  Look at the bright side, at least the Mayor and the Cleveland Partnership are supportive.  It shouldn't take a lot of work to take that to the next level.

^ thanks & that addresses the cvsr dilemma piece of jackson's remarks. makes sense.

 

but what of the other piece? i wonder what he meant by "other proposed projects" that he wouldn't elaborate on?

It was actually Jackson's Chief of Staff Ken Silliman who said that in my presence. But he didn't say what those project's were. If I were a betting man, I would wager that it's probably the convention site at Tower City that's the issue.

From another thread....

 

Wouldn't this encourage sprawl? The CVSR has its major station in Peninsula, and that area, while growing rapidly, is much less developed than the areas near Hudson, Stow, Aurora, etc. I would assume they' do it in Peninsula because there is tons of parking for the park and the train there.

 

Good question. But I think one issue that will keep the CVSR from being a commuter rail corridor is the lack of places to develop around stations. Most of the land along this corridor is part of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, and thus has development restrictions. Perhaps the only places where development could be done is from Independence north to downtown, or in tight clusters around the stations farther south. In either case, does that constitute sprawl?

There is already sprawl in the areas north and south of the park borders.  What it would encourage is the densifying of development in those areas.  With the Towpath and the CVSR, there is truly an intermodal system there. 

 

Another problem with using the CVSR line is that in some areas the line runs too close to the Towpath and other pedestrian traffic (Peninsula and Station Road are two areas that come to mind).  There would have to be some fencing erected to keep people from wandering onto the tracks in the path of a commuter train.  Right now, it's not an issue because the train doesn't have many trips and doesns't go any faster than 25 mph.  But you can't have a successful commuter train at that low of a speed. 

i dk about sprawl, but otherwise i think some of those issues could make cvsr a fine commuter rail line. a scenic ride with few stops? perfect, esp if yr an akronite. during traditional commuting or rush hour trips maybe they dont have to stop at every station within the park that they might on a weekend scenic tourist trip. stations could be modifed. also, certainly there are stretches where they could pick up the speed, no? no question this stuff would cost money and adjustments, but its worth studying and working towards.

 

i dk about sprawl, but otherwise i think some of those issues could make cvsr a fine commuter rail line. a scenic ride with few stops? perfect, esp if yr an akronite. during traditional commuting or rush hour trips maybe they dont have to stop at every station within the park that they might on a weekend scenic tourist trip. stations could be modifed. also, certainly there are stretches where they could pick up the speed, no? no question this stuff would cost money and adjustments, but its worth studying and working towards.

 

 

There are sections where speeds could be increased.  I was just mentioning the problem areas because they would need to be addressed and made safe for park visitors.   

 

Also, just for clarification:  the CVSR has weekday trips during summer and fall.  There is at least one area where there is already a siding (north near the national park headquarters).  There may be another area farther south where another siding could be installed that might be able to alleviate conflicts between the CVSR and the commuter trains.  I'm getting a little out of my element now, though because I don't much about the nuts and bolts of infrastructure at this level.

IMO, the park boosters would probably freak out about erecting anything down there. But who knows.

From the 11/30/06 ABJ:

 

 

New CEO boards scenic railroad

Steven Wait takes helm of valley line

By Bob Downing

Beacon Journal staff writer

 

PENINSULA - Steven W. Wait never had a model train, never had dreams of being a railroad engineer.

 

But the 53-year-old Wait became a railroad man for 31 years and now finds himself president and chief executive officer of the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad.

 

His chief tasks include upgrading and expanding rail operations in the Cuyahoga Valley and south to Akron and Canton, extending the railroad into downtown Cleveland and raising funds for the tourist railroad.

 

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/16129533.htm?source=rss&channel=ohio_news

 

He appears to have a solid, impressive set of credentials. CVSR has come a long way since I rode it about 1991, and I think it's fantastic to see the plans for growth.