Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cleveland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-11-2015, 01:21 AM
 
4,823 posts, read 4,904,892 times
Reputation: 2162

Advertisements

I like the idea of an intermodal transportation hub, but unless the light-rail is looped through the CBD, I don't think it is worth the investment in that location. Run the Waterfront Line up-down E 9th Street and connect back to the current lines south of E 9th Street. Better yet, run it along Euclid and up Cedar to Shaker Square. Run it out to the west side.

Without this type of expansion, the light-rail lines will continue to serve a minimal number of riders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2015, 06:43 AM
 
Location: cleveland
2,365 posts, read 4,353,228 times
Reputation: 1645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamms View Post
I like the idea of an intermodal transportation hub, but unless the light-rail is looped through the CBD, I don't think it is worth the investment in that location. Run the Waterfront Line up-down E 9th Street and connect back to the current lines south of E 9th Street. Better yet, run it along Euclid and up Cedar to Shaker Square. Run it out to the west side.

Without this type of expansion, the light-rail lines will continue to serve a minimal number of riders.
I agree. The waterfront line should travel south from lakefront station(9th,12th 17th ?). South thru playhouse/cleveland st. And loop back towards gateway and tower city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 07:20 AM
 
11,610 posts, read 10,291,307 times
Reputation: 7213
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1watertiger View Post
I agree. The waterfront line should travel south from lakefront station(9th,12th 17th ?). South thru playhouse/cleveland st. And loop back towards gateway and tower city.
How would you do that without building a subway???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 12:07 PM
 
4,823 posts, read 4,904,892 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
How would you do that without building a subway???
Surface lines...like the entire route is except downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 12:08 PM
 
4,823 posts, read 4,904,892 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1watertiger View Post
I agree. The waterfront line should travel south from lakefront station(9th,12th 17th ?). South thru playhouse/cleveland st. And loop back towards gateway and tower city.
Or at least head north-south along E 9th Street circulating through downtown before heading back east to Shaker Heights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 12:35 PM
 
11,610 posts, read 10,291,307 times
Reputation: 7213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamms View Post
Surface lines...like the entire route is except downtown.
So you would eliminate a lane on East 9th St. and Euclid, and/or replace the Healthline buses with a rapid train? Does this make sense until the Healthline reaches full capacity?

IMO, resources would best be spent expanding the Red Line to Euclid, which is under active consideration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Greater Orlampa CSA
5,005 posts, read 5,589,370 times
Reputation: 3924
I guess it would be one of those if you build it, they'll come type things. If you were to have an RTA type train running past Playhouse Square, Cleveland State, etc., and then getting off right at the Clinic and near the Art Museum, I think the ridership would become much heavier, but I can't say that for sure.

Frankly, I'd say the areas where it would be more prudent to have an RTA extend to would be Downtown Lakewood (Looks like there's already a track in place there when I look at Google Maps, and maybe to have a separate line extending from W 98th that could take people directly to Edgewater, or at least closer, because it doesn't seem like there's a super pleasant walking route as we stand now. Perhaps also then, in order to make Edgewater more of a year round destination, make it some sort of outdoor winter sports destination, inside city limits (XC Skiing, etc., etc.)

More unrealistic than that already probably unrealistic thought about Lakewood and Edgewater, perhaps some way to connect Shaker Heights/Square to UC by rail, so that people who live there wouldn't have to have a car to get to positions there. Not sure where this one would go, but somehow passing by/stopping at Coventry, then connecting over with the Little Italy station would truly take the RTA ten steps further.

I could probably go further, and connect the end of the Shaker line to Beachwood/Legacy somehow, but I think in almost all of the cases I mentioned, many landowners/taxpayers likely wouldn't be too happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 03:15 PM
 
11,610 posts, read 10,291,307 times
Reputation: 7213
Even light rail is incredibly expensive to build and operate.

There's no need for it until bus rapids become inadequate. Lakewood now is served by the "Cleveland State" bus rapid line.

Euclid has large park 'n ride lots that could accommodate commuters and the rail line/right of way already exists, but I'm not certain that expanding the Red Line to Euclid is even economical.

It's strange that persons question the need for a pedestrian bridge to the harbor district, but clamor for an expanded rail rapid system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 03:48 PM
 
4,823 posts, read 4,904,892 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
So you would eliminate a lane on East 9th St. and Euclid, and/or replace the Healthline buses with a rapid train? Does this make sense until the Healthline reaches full capacity?

IMO, resources would best be spent expanding the Red Line to Euclid, which is under active consideration.
I would at least take along E 9th Street and connect with the existing tracks south of Carnegie. Cleveland's light-rail was built 100 years ago for residents of Shaker Heights, a limited market being reflected in today's very low ridership numbers. The light-rail needs to be expanded; the Euclid Avenue BRT should have been light-rail all along but for now, it needs to run north-south on E 9th Street and run out to the west side.

I would also build the Transportation Center there as well. Not sure we want that type of congestion on the lakefront. Let Amtrak build and maintain its own station for the limited middle-of-the-night service it provides Cleveland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2015, 03:57 PM
 
4,823 posts, read 4,904,892 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative View Post
So you would eliminate a lane on East 9th St. and Euclid, and/or replace the Healthline buses with a rapid train? Does this make sense until the Healthline reaches full capacity?

IMO, resources would best be spent expanding the Red Line to Euclid, which is under active consideration.
Cleveland's rail system in its CBD is poorly designed; one station under Tower City, not user friendly at all. To have a light-rail system end at Muni Lot is ridiculous, it should loop back into downtown from the lakefront and connect south of E 9th Street. This would be more functional and user friendly. At least potential riders in the CBD would be aware of a rail option.

I was at the Flats East Bank, which is a great area, but if I wanted to get to Playhouse Square, one has to walk or take a cab. The light-rail there drops you off at Tower City or you could go to E 9th/Lakefront and walk up E 9th. Both not practical.

Cities with expanding light-rail systems are designing them to serve current and future riders. Cleveland is, or was, a pro-transit city. It has dropped the ball for 60 years in most cases, except expansion to the airport, and needs to expand from its current transit base.

Last edited by Kamms; 02-11-2015 at 04:38 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cleveland

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top