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.
Prof, please spell out your acronyms on first reference. I think I know that LRT is light rail, and HSR is high-speed rail, but what is HRT (post 6 re:Miami)? If it is high-speed rail transit, how does it differ from regular rail transit? How could it be implemented in Cleveland?
Doing a search, I found nothing for HRT. Ditto, high-speed transit.
Miami's transit is doomed. NOAA expects a foot of sea level rise by 2030, and it will be more in Miami due to more rapidly warming oceans as the Gulf Stream slows and as gravity readjusts as ice melt accelerates in the Arctic and especially Antarctica.
We have much, much greater priorities for spending than mass transit projects if they require massive operating subsidies. The disastrous COVID-19 policies of the Trump administration have crippled the U.S. economy and especially the federal budget deficit.
Mass transit 20 years from now may be more efficient, more pervasive, and very different from today's transit solutions as autonomous vehicles transform the transportation economy.
Blaming the victim a bit. White flight and middle class flight over the last 70 years has done more to hurt RTA than any of these things you list. Taking Cleveland's population from 914k in 1950 to under 400k today will do the damage. With essentially the same amount of people in the metro area, it is a lot to expect RTA to run rail lines to Solon, Westlake, Mentor, Strongsville, etc. to go recapture these people. And to what avail? Much of the office jobs from downtown went out to the burbs too.
The West and South are in the midst of a long term growth spurt - and they're investing in transit/rail in several cities. So they're forward thinking and visionary - or they just have a lot of money to spend and rail transit is one piece in an overall huge transit budget. I'm not convinced it is a wise investment. What is a "no brainer" in NYC or Philly, is very much debatable in Dallas and Houston. Particularly in light of new technology and the new normal of COVID.
While some of this is spot-on true (esp. population loss and its should-be-obvious importance: too many on this forum pooh-pooh this as new shiny high-rises get built), I disagree that transit is/should be debatable because it is in a "newer" Sun Belt city. Car-centric boomtowns such as these are the very places where this is a wise investment. And it's getting done.
I also disagree with the idea that it is a lot to expect RTA to extend out to the burbs. RTA's big fault over the decades (not the small potatoes stuff so many here comment on ad nauseum) is not stretching out into suburbia hardly at all. So much existing right-of-way freight rail line would make this so easy and relatively low-cost, with little demolition or property acquisition needed, etc. This is, after all, a city and region with a huge rail history, be it freight, passenger, or even the old interurban, and railroad right-of-way, bridges (and their underpass clearances if the old rail line goes underneath a road bridge, etc), and even the city/suburban infrastructure is still set up in many ways for all three of the above. Any survey map or even Google Maps or Google Earth spell this out clearly. Relatively little has been replaced or deconstructed regarding Cleveland's century of rail infrastructure. It's there for the taking, and has been there for decades now. So obvious.
Having the Waterfront Line extend along I-90 (park and rides at E 55th, E 105th, E 152nd, E 185th, etc etc) out to Mentor, the Red Line extend to Berea and then to Olmsted Falls, the Shaker lines extend out to I-271 and maybe a bit farther, or having a line southeast near/along the rail of Broadway all the way out to to Bedford and beyond, again along existing freight lines (some abandoned)......not that tough in the big picture. Some NIMBY stuff in the burbs (but I would argue not as strong as in decades past), but again, it's RTA's virtually clean slate to do with as it wishes, but they don't, and haven't. This has been their biggest weakness to date. Golden opportunities, esp. with some big-time Fed funding available here and there in the past twenty years, now vanished, with no large-scale return of those funds in sight.
There has not been a substantial amount of funding available for the sole purpose of expanding the rapid system since the Waterfront Line. That was 25 years ago. Plans and proposals abound, funding does not. The US of A at large does NOT care about mass transportation unless it has wings. The only area of the country where there is significant development is the coastal northeast. Blaming the RTA for not expanding the system is tantamount to blaming a SS dependent retired person for not building a new house.
While some of this is spot-on true (esp. population loss and its should-be-obvious importance: too many on this forum pooh-pooh this as new shiny high-rises get built), I disagree that transit is/should be debatable because it is in a "newer" Sun Belt city. Car-centric boomtowns such as these are the very places where this is a wise investment. And it's getting done.
I also disagree with the idea that it is a lot to expect RTA to extend out to the burbs. RTA's big fault over the decades (not the small potatoes stuff so many here comment on ad nauseum) is not stretching out into suburbia hardly at all. So much existing right-of-way freight rail line would make this so easy and relatively low-cost, with little demolition or property acquisition needed, etc. This is, after all, a city and region with a huge rail history, be it freight, passenger, or even the old interurban, and railroad right-of-way, bridges (and their underpass clearances if the old rail line goes underneath a road bridge, etc), and even the city/suburban infrastructure is still set up in many ways for all three of the above. Any survey map or even Google Maps or Google Earth spell this out clearly. Relatively little has been replaced or deconstructed regarding Cleveland's century of rail infrastructure. It's there for the taking, and has been there for decades now. So obvious.
Having the Waterfront Line extend along I-90 (park and rides at E 55th, E 105th, E 152nd, E 185th, etc etc) out to Mentor, the Red Line extend to Berea and then to Olmsted Falls, the Shaker lines extend out to I-271 and maybe a bit farther, or having a line southeast near/along the rail of Broadway all the way out to to Bedford and beyond, again along existing freight lines (some abandoned)......not that tough in the big picture. Some NIMBY stuff in the burbs (but I would argue not as strong as in decades past), but again, it's RTA's virtually clean slate to do with as it wishes, but they don't, and haven't. This has been their biggest weakness to date. Golden opportunities, esp. with some big-time Fed funding available here and there in the past twenty years, now vanished, with no large-scale return of those funds in sight.
As Cleveland_Collector also noted, we really can't be throwing 100s of millions of dollars around on expanding rail lines. It all sounds cool, extending the red line to Berea and the waterfront line to Mentor, but that alone would take about a $1B to implement, this for a metro population which has not grown since the 60s. Its just not in the cards. And I really wish people would be a little pragmatic here. Do you think for one second that most people in our metropolitan area - or any metro area for that matter - would tolerate spending a billion dollars expanding a rail line while the region has a flatline population. Think tax base and number of users. I'll take that $1B and clean the environment first, or gobble up more parkland.
Prof, please spell out your acronyms on first reference. I think I know that LRT is light rail, and HSR is high-speed rail, but what is HRT (post 6 re:Miami)? If it is high-speed rail transit, how does it differ from regular rail transit? How could it be implemented in Cleveland?
Doing a search, I found nothing for HRT. Ditto, high-speed transit.
Thanks.
Sorry, HRT is "heavy rail transit"; in Cleveland's case, the Red Line -- kinda the yin of LRT's yang.
I'm not "conveniently" ignoring anything. I never said there wasn't some development. I'm saying its paltry. I'm also highlighting how fragmented our national approach to modern mass transit outside of aircraft really is and, ironically and clearly without intention, so are you. Your own diatribe is a tacit admission as you're only able to name a handful of cities with anything resembling decent rail systems. The cities with irons in the fire are wonderful concepts, but they are still largely on paper and likely to dry up with the current economic downturn - e.g., most of the above California HSR citation has already been shelved.
Florida is a huge state with about a dozen major cities and 20+ million people. The Miami-Dade metrorail is the ONLY one of its kind in Florida and is SHORTER than the combined RTA lines by 13 miles and has 28 fewer stops. The only other city in Florida with a fairly decent system is Orlando. So, yes, Florida's system (if you can even call it that) is a relative joke.
You have somehow taken to the notion that I think this is a good thing -- how, I have no idea. I think its a travesty. I'm simply pointing out the reality that the US in general doesn't give a crap about terrestrial mass transit. It's not just Ohio and/or the midwest. If you want to see a country that does, take a trip to China. Every city in the modern, industrialized area of the country has an extensive metro system, many of which are linked by inter-city HSR. We have absolutely nothing like it outside of the coastal portion of the northeast.
I'll take you at your word that you're not against transit. Understand, though, that your comments could be interpreted as such. Why? You won't get any argument from me that the United States is in the dark ages about transit and that way too many people and institutions in this country discourage it. But when, at least, there's at least a little positive growth, I'd think you'd acknowledge it, not poo-poo it.
Yes, Miami should absolutely have a larger Metro system than it does. They've made a lot of mistakes in getting it expanded. But at least the system is very well patronized (I wish we had, in Cleveland, even half of their riders). And unlike Cleveland, the Metro has 3 downtown stations and connects with the fascinating, totally-automated Metro Mover which circulates all over downtown in a loop and multiple lines And yes, MM is free -- I'd take their free MM over our free downtown trolleys -- not to say I dislike the trolleys, because I do like them and use them frequently when I'm downtown. I wish you would acknowledge, though, that at least in the massive Miami/South Florida metro area, they are aggressively expanding regional and commuter rail with expanded Tri-Rail and the expanding high(er) speed regional rail system (Brightline; now owned by Branson's Virgin Rail America co.).
Sure, we're still way behind the rest of the industrialized world, but there are enlightened pockets that are trying. Virgin Rail/Brightline, Texas (planned HSR between Dallas and Houston), Cali-Nevada (Virgin's planned Vegas-to-LA HSR) and Denver's new massive/growing LRT-Commuter rail network are all examples of ways around out backwards/stubborn (almost always Republican) pols: public-private partnerships (now known as P3). In an imbalanced 'have & have not' country like ours, where under Republicans like Trump and others favor fat cats getting fatter, why not put some of that wealth to good public use like trains and transit?
Thankfully there ARE public-minded billionaires like Sir. Richard Branson ... oh I forgot, he's from England.. But I'm sure glad he's working the States!!!!
As Cleveland_Collector also noted, we really can't be throwing 100s of millions of dollars around on expanding rail lines. It all sounds cool, extending the red line to Berea and the waterfront line to Mentor, but that alone would take about a $1B to implement, this for a metro population which has not grown since the 60s. Its just not in the cards. And I really wish people would be a little pragmatic here. Do you think for one second that most people in our metropolitan area - or any metro area for that matter - would tolerate spending a billion dollars expanding a rail line while the region has a flatline population. Think tax base and number of users. I'll take that $1B and clean the environment first, or gobble up more parkland.
What you're saying is not wrong. I don't think spending billions to expand subways and extend Rapid lines to say, Mentor, make sense at this time given Cuy County's shrinkage. But there are worthy rail extensions -- ie, commuter rail through Lakewood out to Lorain along the lightly used N-S corridor. RTA could use conventional trains or self-propelled light-rail diesel cars as several Cali cities (and Portland and Austin, TX) do.
And why not expand an LRT line from Tower City (use the extant, unused old Shaker terminal) under through the unused Detroit-Superior Bridge subway rising to street level along Detroit in the booming North Ohio City/Hingetown, Detroit-Shoreway area?
Why not (finally) build that long-discussed multi-modal rail/bus station along the lakefront near E. 9th hosting the Waterfront Line, Amtrak, Greyhound and, perhaps, future commuter rail? (and maybe even provide an indoor connection to the Huntington Convention Center -- which SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT when the CC was remodeled.
All these additions are doable and, even though you're citing costs, the Feds still pay 50%.
But Clevelanders would rather do more to HURT transit then help it, like doing stupid stuff like blocking our beautiful Tower City rail station with a building; not connecting the Convention Center to the WFL, refusing to build the North Coast multi-modal station/terminal, building an FRI fortress at the end of the WFL or even running the WFL correctly (like on weekend evenings when the crowds are in the Flats)..
... and apparently our 'dumb transit' tradition is continuing... While the Opportunity Corridor is apparently helping clean up the area in Kinsman/Central inner city neighborhoods, the latest proposal for development near the rebuilding E. 79th Red Line station? A waste recycling plant... Boy, that'll really pack in riders, won't it?
Then after we do all this stupid stuff, the transit naysayers then surface to say: 'see, we told you transit doesn't work in Cleveland!' ... it's a never-ending cycle ... well, it will end when/if we eventually kill off the rail system we've got. Guess that would make a lot of people happy.
not to say I dislike the trolleys, because I do like them and use them frequently when I'm downtown.
Anecdotally, I've had guests pooh-pooh the idea of taking the rapid to downtown events if it was going to require a transfer to the "trolley" (let's be honest, it's a dressed up bus). This is why I see the Waterfront Line as so important. It's so much easier for people to hop the Blue and Green lines and take it all the way to the Flats or a Browns game. Even transferring from the Red Line is much more straightforward than getting to street level at Public Square and figuring out the trolleys.
On that topic, I think that dubbing it "the Waterfront Line" created some unnecessary confusion. If you're new to RTA, the separate name makes it seem like you'll have to transfer off of the Blue/Green line to ride it.
Anecdotally, I've had guests pooh-pooh the idea of taking the rapid to downtown events if it was going to require a transfer to the "trolley" (let's be honest, it's a dressed up bus). This is why I see the Waterfront Line as so important. It's so much easier for people to hop the Blue and Green lines and take it all the way to the Flats or a Browns game. Even transferring from the Red Line is much more straightforward than getting to street level at Public Square and figuring out the trolleys.
On that topic, I think that dubbing it "the Waterfront Line" created some unnecessary confusion. If you're new to RTA, the separate name makes it seem like you'll have to transfer off of the Blue/Green line to ride it.
Yes! Yes! and Yes! This hits the nail squarely on the head.
The whole Waterfront Line thing is a near tragedy (at least its still barely running). Yes, I get that it has some limited facility and often runs with empty cars. But a lot of this is because of how poorly this line has been marketed and run. Ex-RTA GM Joe Calabrese started this tradition of contempt for the WFL ... reflecting, I think, his general contempt and/or indifference to the RTA's rail division in general. Current management is carrying on Joe C's tradition of contempt for the WFL.
Ferraris is correct that the WFL is the fastest and best way to get to the Flats from upper SE of Cleveland, Shaker Square, Shaker and adjacent Eastern suburbs -- and the Blue/Green LRT division is 1/3rd of the rail system (actually more than that when sheer route miles are considered).
And, yes, it is just poor marketing communication on RTA's part that does not, in any of its literature or communication about the WFL, that states clearly the 1-seat ride to the Flats or N. Coast Harbor from Shaker. To this day RTA's website and other communications state: riders can "... take any rail line into Tower City and then (pick up or transfer to) the Waterfront Line" for the remainder of their trip to Browns Games, Flats festivals, Tall Ships, Air Show, etc... Why? That's just plain dumb. I have Cleveland friends who live in the Blue/Green Line area and have never taken the WFL even going to Browns games, buddies hop off at Tower City and walk W. 3rd because they don't understand that the WFL goes through. Many people believe its some kind of hassle to take the Blue or Green Line in and transfer to the WFL and, to them, that's too much of a hassle.
And of course, RTA's running the line every 30 mins for so short of a distance scares away riders too ... me included many times. If I'm not on a Blue or Green Line train that goes through, I have to sit in TC for 15 minutes to get to the Flats East Bank... sometimes I wait, but oftentimes, I walk, esp on a nice day.
Then the mess is compounded when, on warm weekend evenings, just when the crowds are building, RTA cuts off WFL services at 7p for the C-Line Trolley (which only runs to 11p anyway, whereas trains run until 12:15-- which should be 2:15a on Fridays and Sats during summer, as the WFL did in the pre-Joe C era). I don't want to rehash the Trolley vs. WFL debate; but just to reiterate, these routes serve different crowds and people from outlying Cleveland and close in burbs, who wish to ride directly to the Flats East Bank (and not circulate all over downtown, as some bar hoppers and tourist like to do). Flats East Bank itself is a destination and evening in itself for most people... Ferraris is absolutely correct on this.
But RTA and the WFL naysayers are hard-headed.
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.
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.
