Blue Line

I like your style, j3shafer. My sentiments exactly.

Quick! Everyone buy a Prius!

Sorry. I didn't mean to say that they weren't capable. It was just me hoping that they wouldn't. Yeah, ambiguous.

All right. Just a little research led me to find this article from the Plain Dealer: http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2007/08/inner_belt.html It looks like their proposed highway cap project would allow for buildings as high as 25 stories on 23 acres of surface area. I'd still love to see how they do it from the ground up though.

However they end up accommodating actual structures on the caps, I'm sure it'll be a puzzle to be solved.

Well, I'd say an enterprise looking for a new location isn't going to be looking at the Cap. Each of those companies has massive parking accommodations. Where would you suggest they put parking for their employees? They most certainly couldn't put it on the Cap. I do think we are getting a little carried away with the ideas revolving five-story buildings on the Cap. We haven't even seen how that would even work. As I said earlier: utilities. I'm assuming that the Banks will have utilities all underground. How would that work on the Cap? I think it's too early to really speculate with some of the questions answered. We can continue SimCity talk though, I suppose. I'll go back to the idea of a grand park that actually says something about the city--its history and its prowess--and perhaps a few structures on the ends to serve as buffer from the Interstate ramps.

Yet one more thing to add to all those YouTube videos that feature McCain's predictable record of flip-flopping on everything under the sun. Now's the time to have faith in Congress to do the right thing...

Well, I'd say you're comparing apples and oranges here, if you're using Japan as an example. Are foreign air carriers going under like ours are? It seems that we're having a tougher time than Europe and China or Japan are. Their airlines aren't as subject to our economic problems as ours are, and we haven't seen many European carriers merging lately. The reason for crying that the end is near domestically is that it's hitting within a very short period of time. Other countries are weathering the rise in cost for effectively because they haven't had such low prices as we have over decades. I'd say that's reason enough for the domestic carriers to worry. I'd also disagree that "legacy carriers in North America *would rather* get another round of government help." While they reporting losses of several billion dollars annually, frankly, I don't think they *have* a choice. Some do, most don't.

You didn't say 20 or 30 years originally. You said, imagine if several metro airports suddenly CLOSED. I apologize if I took you the wrong way, but I don't think my interpretation was that for off base from what you initially posted. Modified: Again, toning it down Point taken. Handshakes and safetybelts. I do believe that many airports will age so much, and there won't be much incentive to keep some of them functional. If they're primarily used for freight, and regions begin to work in cooperation with each other, what would be the advantage to having two or three large airports with 100 miles or less of each other? Ground transportation would make up for that.

Don't be an ass, buddy. I've already contributed to this topic before. Based on the responses, I don't believe I scared anyone. I'd prefer not to have further discussion about your weak assessment of my participation. It was just a hypothetical, as many airlines will be merging with others to stay afloat. Others will put out of certain regions. Airports will have to consolidate their operations. There are other options for cargo transport too. Airports are expensive operations. In twenty to thirty years, some airports might be better left for dead.

Absolutely.

So what kind of funding do these businesses get? Is that to say that some of them aren't doing as well as it seems?

Can you imagine if several metro airports suddenly...CLOSED?

I don't think that any progress has been made. I'd love to be told otherwise though.

Are you sure about that $30 million tag? I don't think you could do much of anything in terms of transit for $30 million. I was thinking more like $3 billion.

That's a great article. Thanks so much for that. I'm guessing that was written last year, based on its streetcar system cost estimation?

Who decides whether the tunnel are to be filled and sealed anyway? Perhaps it's just been a dead issue lately with the promise of a better tomorrow. I'm fine with that too, and I hope they can use them for something transit-oriented (rather than utility caverns for wi-fi and water. I'm just wondering if they *should* fill them in already, and think about digging tunnels at a later time, when light rail *is* a reality and there's a need for it. The existing station platforms are relatively short by today's standards. As with any transit system, the location of stations is dependent on density and the areas that would be best served. Would the station locations chosen in the 1920's still benefit us the same way, or would we deliberately create TOD around these existing sites? Who knows.

Well, I was referring to the foreseeable future. Pardon. Plus, even if we do get light rail, I see it as being an extension of the streetcar system. Most of the subway tunnels exist near downtown, which will already be served by streetcar service. Using the old subway tunnels would cost an exorbitant sum of money, and I would see it as redundant and not very cost-effective. Of course my opinion may change in a decade or two.

I'd be lying if I didn't expect the same out of Baker as he already exhibited in Chicago. Why did we hire such a loser (pardon the word choice)?

You're asking me?

We need to lessen our dependence on oil, period. This is what happens when people get so attached to a key media phrase--foreign oil. Dependency on foreign oil. How many times have you heard those three words used together. Same with "addicted to oil". We're not addicted to anything. Some people are just left with very many choices. Others made certain lifestyle changes that didn't seem too consequential at the time. Now it's time to admit that we made a mistake. None of us can say that we knew all along, and we've been going against the grain of oil dependency for years now. Now it's time to admit that we made a mistake. Oil consumption isn't just limited to energy either. We use plastics during every day of our lives, which is dully dependent on OIL! More products we buy are made from plastic than ever before. Cover sheets, shrink wrap, containers, packaging, electronics, other household items, construction materials. If anything, let's put it in context. If we are, indeed, addicted to oil, I think we should focus more on our daily lifestyles. Some of us can live without feeding oil-based fuel to an automobile. Can many of us live without plastic in our lives? Believe me, I try. I can't tell you it's very easy. It doesn't mean I'm an addict. It means I have limited choices.

They still DON'T have the money. City Council voted to approve streetcars, but that doesn't mean the money exists for construction. Any project like this requires approval from the city. Council gave the go-ahead for the city manager to find private funding sources. That's the reason for the wait. Please read earlier posts to gain insight on the issue. Oh, and the subway will continue to exist as urban caverns. Don't hold your breath.

I think that's the mistake though. Downtown isn't seamless as it is. It's a result of several generations of architecture, culture, and influence. It definitely shines through when a large scale project is made to be "seamless". It looks like a replica of something that never existed in real life but only as a rendering, not as something that reflects the city's culture as it evolves.

Wow, nice stitch job. Especially with a film camera.