Cleveland Port Authority plans

**eastland** · September-07-11, 08:58 PM

Cleveland strategic plan for Port Authority includes ferry service to London.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011...d-cuyahog.html

**DetroitPlanner** · September-08-11, 11:19 AM

uhhh somebody better tell Cleveland that London is not a Port City!

**iheartthed** · September-08-11, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

uhhh somebody better tell Cleveland that London is not a Port City!

Don't get bogged down with details.

**Detroitnerd** · September-08-11, 11:34 AM

That is weird. That last 50 miles is going to be mighty hard on that ferry!

**DetroitPlanner** · September-08-11, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

That is weird. That last 50 miles is going to be mighty hard on that ferry!

There is no navigable river that will get them there. Its a relatively short trip by rail or highway for goods. It does not make much sense to unload in Port Stanley and load it up on trucks to get it the last few miles. Three times the work. I am unsure of what they expect to ship back to Cleveland being that London is all about the Western Ontario University, and an adminstrative center. I think they have a Kelloggs plant, but would it not be esier to get that from Battle Creek? The Lincoln/Crown Vic plant in St Thomas is closed too.....

Maybe they just want to avoid Maroun?

**Detroitnerd** · September-08-11, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

There is no navigable river that will get them there.

Well, that was my joke. At least I laughed when I wrote that.

**kryptonite** · September-08-11, 01:38 PM

Wow, that has to be one of the most poorly written articles I have read in a long time. For starters, just as prior posts have said, London is not a port.

If the journalist or source made an error and meant Toronto instead of London, then I could understand. But the population of Toronto is not anywhere near what they quote, it's much more. And ferry service from Cleveland to Toronto would be quite a distance, the article makes almost no point whatsoever. It mentions Cuyahoga river silt, a new port, etc., and never connects all of the information together. I would give the article a "F" - for failing.

**iheartthed** · September-08-11, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by kryptonite

Wow, that has to be one of the most poorly written articles I have read in a long time. For starters, just as prior posts have said, London is not a port.

If the journalist or source made an error and meant Toronto instead of London, then I could understand. But the population of Toronto is not anywhere near what they quote, it's much more. And ferry service from Cleveland to Toronto would be quite a distance, the article makes almost no point whatsoever. It mentions Cuyahoga river silt, a new port, etc., and never connects all of the information together. I would give the article a "F" - for failing.

Cleveland and Toronto also don't sit on the same lake...

**DetroitPlanner** · September-08-11, 02:18 PM

Krypton I agree the whole Burke Airport discussion was odd and out of place.

Toronto/Hamilton would make a lot more sense, but it is a lot further away than the author indicates. You would think he would mention the Welland canal as well, but the author or editor provided poor details.

**Detroitnerd** · September-08-11, 02:32 PM

They must really be cutting back at the Plain Dealer. There is no way a fact-checker, copy editor or competent proofreader wouldn't have caught the whopper in there. Must be direct laptop-to-blog content for that goof to live.

Also, it is a sad and embarrassing commentary upon the people of Cleveland that, upon hearing this plan, "not one of the estimated 50 people attending the public meeting at the port's headquarters criticized any of the ideas in the strategic plan."

**gnome** · September-08-11, 03:07 PM

Doesn't look like any of the folks in the Plain Dealer's comment section, caught the error either.

**DetroitPlanner** · September-08-11, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Also, it is a sad and embarrassing commentary upon the people of Cleveland that, upon hearing this plan, "not one of the estimated 50 people attending the public meeting at the port's headquarters criticized any of the ideas in the strategic plan."

Maybe the planner has one of these!

**illwill** · September-08-11, 03:53 PM

I hate to bag on other cities but Cleveland is certainly not a destination city. That place is dead and there just isn't anything exciting about Cleveland. You never hear ANYTHING about it and if you do, it's not good. Especially since Lebron left. I certainly hope for the best but I think "it is, what it is."

It must be rough when your region competitors are Detroit and Chicago.

**canuck** · September-08-11, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by illwill

I hate to bag on other cities but Cleveland is certainly not a destination city. That place is dead and there just isn't anything exciting about Cleveland. You never hear ANYTHING about it and if you do, it's not good. Especially since Lebron left. I certainly hope for the best but I think "it is, what it is."

It must be rough when your region competitors are Detroit and Chicago.

Maybe the Port Authority could set fire to the river once in a while like they used to. That would be a heck of an attraction.