327

We sure would. Who controls it now, the Houston Chamber of Commerce? The school district doesn't need to control land use for land use to be controlled in a way that makes sense, given that schools are a major beneficiary. This is a basic duty of those controlling land use at the city and county levels. Property values and bond ratings and everything else are all highly dependent on school system quality. Main Street frontage should not be given away, underutilized or underdeveloped. That is waste pure and simple.

I always love those Y-town photo spreads.

These plans I referred to do not involve demolition! Not overtly, anyway, falling a step short of political acknowledgement. Mass demo is my own little recipe. These plans should be available on Frank Jackson's website. They're from early in his 1st term and I don't remember what they're even called. But they did a pretty thorough job identifying goals and challenges for each neighborhood. The "obsolete housing" bit came up for places like Mt. Pleasant. They left hanging the question of what a city might do when a city determines that entire blocks of its housing are obsolete.

Citizens Against Virtually Everything = spitting out my coffee with laughter Referring to Ohioans as cave dwellers = spitting on the clientele OK the "Ohio engineering firm" complaint is loopy. That's grasping at straws. And there is a certain irony in pro-business republicans pointing out someone else's conflicts of interest. But that doesn't mean there are no conflicts, and consultants are used all the time to legitmize what people want to do. I've had consulting gigs like this. It's really not uncommon and it's not rail-specific at all. Doesn't matter if the consultant is mandatory. The only consultant I trust 100% is the one paid by an uninterested third party. This attitude toward consultants is not uncommon either. It's a tough thing for consultants to overcome, but it's part of the business. Questioning the consultant and scrutinizing their methods is a rudimentary political dance move. This is normal. These republicans are just doing their jobs. Their disagreement with the plan here does not make them bad people. It doesn't make them troglodytes either. I myself would like to know more about how our ridership estimates were calculated. I would also like to know what decision metrics were used to select this plan over others. I would pay close attention to whether they used Boston and Chicago as comparables, and if alternative plans look like they may have been shrugged off. I've seen plenty of reports like that in my day, so it's not surprising to hear these lines of attack come up. All we can do now is already have been prepared for them. I hope we're prepared and I hope the consultants' model withstands scrutiny.

arenn, did you get quoted in Scene this week? Adjusting will be very tough for places like Cleveland. Another problem for Cleveland in particular is that so much of its housing is an obsolete format (wooden over/unders), and wouldn't be highly marketable even in top condition. Supply needs to be reduced, with bulldozers. On the good side: Cleveland, outside of downtown, has a dearth of appropriate housing for single professionals who work in the city. So unlike maybe Youngstown/Detroit/Buffalo, Cleveland actually has unmet demand to address. That said, we still need a fleet of bulldozers to roll through. The mayor's neighborhood-level plans, released several years ago, openly acknowledge that obsolete housing forms are holding the city back.

Thank you, one last curiosity on this: I know you've written about the lead times before. What I really want to know is why do we still have 10 years of lead time remaining on Cle-Pitt but next to none left on 3C? This gives the impression that next to nothing has been done up till now to advance the Cle-Pitt line... if not next to nothing in the absolute, then certainly in comparison with 3C. Was this an ORDC decision? Based on that statute from 1994? And how, if they so desired, could Valley residents, and /or Akron-Canton residents, best express their wishes to the Ohio rail powers that be? Recall that the Valley didn't get a casino either... people there are feeling a bit unloved right now. We appear to fundamentally disagree on the relationship between speed and "urban support systems" and I don't intend to resolve that issue here. Thank you once again.

No thank you. But what do you mean by "start-up?" Much of this is an existing Amtrak corridor, with trains running right now as we speak... and somehow it's 10 years behind 3C, which is entirely hypothetical? And we're prioritizing service through Lima equally with NYC-CHI and CLE-PIT? Really? I don't understand addressing five different Ohio Hub lines together, when one in particular is obviously the most important. I've looked at the other thread, and it doesn't answer these priority and coordination questions. In fact, all the late 2009 posts there lead one to believe that hi-speed Youngstown service would be the highest priority, not maybe 10 years after 3C. So how is it now still languishing at square one, 10 years away from shovel-ready? When 3C got awarded the funding, all the hopeful Y-town talk dried up and now it's being discussed as if Amtrak goes nowhere near there several times a day. Despite my clear incredulity, these are questions and not accusations. I get asked these questions from time to time (being from Youngstown and pro-rail) and I would like to be able to do a better job answering them when they come up.

I love it. Does Ohio have a similar agreement with surrounding states? So Ohio is already in this agreement right here... whose purpose is already set forth, above... what cooperative options with other states have been discussed for Ohio through MIPRC? At what point did they die, or get back-burnered? How do those discussions relate to Ohio's decision to pursue an Ohio-only line? Were any MIPRC discussions held at all regarding that decision? Based on their map, all the Ohio-Hub lines seem to be of equal priority, though some of the non-3C lines passing through Ohio appear more fundamental to the overall MIPRC plan. I would imagine, just guessing, that Mr. Hagan would really like for Youngstown to get some attention. But there's no discussion of that taking place, at least not on the public front burner. What exactly is the plan for Youngstown, and what is that plan's priority in the grand scheme? And how many grand schemes are there? A layman might look at that map and come away reasonably expecting Ohio to address Youngstown service before Columbus.

Indeed, LK. Population decline sucks when it's the young and productive segment declining. A corollary is that the interests of that smaller youth segment will consistently lose at the ballot box, so until the larger aged population dies off, the youth will do exactly as they're told economically. They'll pay on their own student loans plus their parents' retirement, even though they won't get the retirement and the parents didn't have the student loans. And the parents had tons of great entry level work opportunities, with high social mobility... while the kids have been rendered physically obsolete, and need perhaps multiple degrees to be economically viable. Never has there been a larger "transfer payment."

I love it. Does Ohio have a similar agreement with surrounding states?

That sure is some funny math! If you are driving 75mph, that's 3 hours 29 minutes of actual driving time. That means you are taking 2 -45 minute potty breaks! Which is it? You know, a few months ago I wasn't sold on the merits of this plan and certainly didn't have all the information. One problem I saw, and actually continue to see, is that there is very little connection between Cleveland and Cincinnati. But really, the vast majority of people will be using this thing to go back and forth to Columbus, or from Cincinnati to Dayton. Which makes a lot more sense than wondering why anyone would take a train from Cleveland to Cincinnati. Yup. And on the Clevleand end, there's little discussion (that I've heard) about trips beyond Columbus. This is what led me to my earlier point that statewide coverage was of little practical value and we're trying to do too much at once. Make one of these markets truly happy with their rail service, then move on to the other one. Something like a 2C+2C with Columbus counted twice. Actually I still think so... but I realize it's a dead issue here so OK. I fully agree that the focus should not be on trips spanning the entire state, because the numbers for those trips are less favorable, and people are less likely to take those trips anyway. We don't want people judging this on its Cin-Cle aspects. We want them to consider it for trips they're more likely to take.

It's a question, not necessarily an argument, which was just raised today in a public debate. And generally the audience, not the proponent, decides what's been proven false and what hasn't. Things have been asserted plenty of times, yet people other than me continue bringing up "the same tired argument." Maybe they don't view their own questions in such a derisive way... maybe they see it as a core issue being repeatedly brushed aside. I've heard this raised by many people, beyond myself, who generally support rail and specifically support this project. Again... I support this project, I'm not the enemy. There shouldn't even be an enemy. The only reason highway speeds come into it is that-- regardless of maximum speeds-- the average speed for a car on the highway is more than the average for 3C starting out. That's it. But that's a big deal to some people. And today I mentioned retirees, because maybe it's less of a big deal to them. Instead of claiming the speed issue is a reason not to do the project, I've tried to suggest a way to market 3C in spite of the lingering speed concerns.

??? I know there's Thruway Motorcoach service available to connect Detroit and Toledo (which is run by Amtrak, so the schedules match up). It's not as ideal as a rail line directly connecting them, but it's far better than going through Chicago. Is this service new, maybe? This was in 1999 or 2000. The info came from Amtrak themselves when I called to buy a ticket. If I had had the money they wanted for that ticket, I wouldn't have been car-free at the time.

Thanks for the info UrbanSurfin. I like Seney's emphasis on manufacturing. Although, having worked for one of these suppliers, I can tell you that the counterpoint does have some merit. The primary equipment manufacturers (of the trains themselves) are indeed located outside the US. I just see that as an opportunity for Ohio to produce a company to compete with them, and the location of so many suppliers here makes that a reasonable thing to pursue (like right now). Seney also made an excellent point about building the highways. Unfortunately the issues of speed and schedule are not similarly applicable to highways. When driving, the speed is your speed and the schedule is your schedule. If competitive speed and schedules for rail require more upfront infrastructure than the interstates did, that's a legitimate issue we need to deal with. The fact that more infrastructure is required to make 3C competitive does not negate the actual need for it to be competitive. In other words that's not a solution... it's an excuse for not having one. We can't answer questions about utility with talking points about infrastructure, and then berate people for asking the utility questions again. That's obfuscation. It's also pretty transparent, and leaves the listener perhaps more concerned about speed and schedules than they were before they asked. I have to ask, have you traveled on Amtrak? If not, I think it would be a good idea. Although one day-trip wouldn't put you on the same footing with many of the posters in this thread who have many miles of rail travel behind them, both in the US and abroad, it would help answer some of your questions and give you a clearer understanding of the comparisons between train and other modes. Nope. I looked into it before, but based on the prices and times I went with Greyhound. The biggest problem was that my Amtrak trip from Detroit to Youngstown had to go through Chicago. No direct Toledo connection available. This is why I'm so glad to see our rail system expanding... but sad that Ohio isn't first connecting its cities to the bigger ones nearby. I realize my "it has transit" argument doesn't work for Detroit, but it's a pretty logical move as far as Toledo's concerned and that metro is considerably larger than anything along 3C. And I hope we're not comparing D&D wizard levels as far as rail ridership. I also hope we're not expecting Ohioans to take random Amtrak rides in order to familiarize themselves. Dana Carvey as George Bush says: Not gonna do it! I myself would like to find a way to take an Amtrak ride in the near future. But I don't travel all that much, and I given that I'm already posting here, you can safely assume I'm a rail proponent. So again... it doesn't matter what I personally think, know or believe. I'm already sold. I'm trying to discuss the marketing of this idea from the perspective of groups that I'm not in, like republicans and undecideds and retirees. Perhaps even undecided republican retirees. Call it a thought experiment. Most of the Ohio market is unfamiliar with Amtrak, doesn't plan on checking it out right now, and doesn't want to be judged on that basis. Yet they may already support this plan, or they may be easily convinced. I do think it matters whether likely voters and likely riders are aware of these restroom facilities... and I'm willing to bet it hasn't really crossed their minds either way. These people will only hear what's put out there for them. Framing the issue means a lot. Right now they're hearing ideological debates and a bunch of stats, all of which sounds pretty wonky to them. Kinda like we do. Most of the market doesn't give a hoot about statistics or abstractions either. That stuff is for the people on the pro and anti sides of all this, and neither side accepts the others' stats anyway. Joe Blow doesn't care. He wants to know about the details of the service itself. Chances are that this is how he will be sold or not sold. That's why I keep wanting to look deeper into the market for this and tailor the message to the market's specific concerns, whatever those might be. And I offer that restrooom facilities are probably one of them. Food service too. If it's better than eating on an airliner, that seems like a decent selling point. Instead they're hearing about the near certainty of ridership gains over the years... as if they themselves are livestock, predictable and lacking free will. Their desires and priorities mean nothing. Nobody needs for them to be sold on anything because the whole matter is over their heads. Either they like this plan for whatever reasons we deign to give them or they're irretreivably backwards. I think we could make a more favorable impression with "heeere, kitty kitty kitty kitty" than with this treating people like numbers approach.

"Going often? Stopping and starting? Going in the middle of the night? Maybe it's not your bladder. Maybe it's an enlarged prostate." Or the pipe-people (with bladder meters) who are confident enough on this pill that they can be on a boat, or in a hedgerow maze, where there's no bathrooms. There are so many of these that Saturday Night Live did a parody a few years ago. "Thick golden braids!" My point is that this might sell well among retirees, on bathrooms alone. I know plenty of older people who can tell you where all the rest areas are on the interstates around here. It's at least as big a deal as wi-fi to them. My other point is that retirees lead the league in voter turnout. Inverted pyramid and all. I think retirees and semi-retirees are an important demographic for this on more than one level.

We already are at their level. Invective, conspiracies, the whole works. We should focus on the "persuadables" and not the vehement anti crowd. Focusing on the opposition helps them as much as it helps us. That's what they want. But legislators want to know that their average constituents, who don't have a horse in this race, are at least minimally supportive of the project. To me that means selling the rail experience, which includes wi-fi and all the trimmings, but also the ability of average people to use 3C for their own typical trips along the route. Without that, the trimmings don't amount to anything. What sort of riders do we expect to have on 3C? For what purposes are their trips? How will it work for them? Answering those questions would quiet the Harris line of attack. And these expected riders are the people who need to be reached... especially if the controlling board punts until after the election. If that happens, 3C pretty much needs to win this election district by district. At the moment I think Harris expects otherwise and would prefer to shoot this down with a bigger "mandate" behind him. Speaking of trimmings, I assume there will be restrooms on these trains? Nice ones? There sure are a lot of urination commercials on TV these days. What a big advantage for rail over car travel. Means a lot more than the internet for some people, especially retired people who can be more flexible about their travel times than business travellers can.

I think it may be closed closed, or just about. Not a good sign that Town Fryer left, and as I recall they didn't have anything good to say about the area's street activity. If we're really putting in this mental hospital we might as well tear the Agora down, because at that point it's a stupid place to have a theater. I'd say it already is, except for the potential of the empty lots nearby. Soon to be not empty.

Neither churches nor hospitals pay property taxes, so I'd like to have something else happen there like a large apartment building. That area needs suitable housing for professionals and lots of it. Or I guess I wouldn't mind seeing the church rebuilt, as long as they do a good job architecturally... I'm looking at you, Mormons.

I have to agree that while this is awfully convenient for the Clinic... arson is a serious charge and shouldn't be thrown around lightly. There's nothing here to go on but motive, and even that's tenuous. Did they have an option on the land or something? With that recent west side gas explosion, there was evidence of misfeasance on Dominion's part. Campus Partners had campaigned for years against the High Street bars, several of which all burnt down together and not in a lightning storm. This here isn't nearly as fishy.

At this point I would just like to say that CSU's Journal of Law and Health is totally awesome.

^ Great article and great list, although I wish it were longer. Now That's Class has Donkey Kong! Phantasy has a pirate ship! Winchester! Agora! But they included Pat's, so all is well. A national treasure is Pat's. Our regional marketing efforts need to do more with this. One gathers that the current promotional materials are written by older executive types. Efforts are made to highlight "family" attractions but not those appealing to the young. We go all out to promote visual arts and theater here... let's double those efforts toward the art form we're most famous for.

Northern Ohio should be called Standard Oil. Sounds better than North Coast... a term I've always winced at. How about Neo, as in Keanu Reeves? Ever better: Western New England.

If you do want to be a practicing lawyer, law review and moot court are bigger deals than they may seem upfront. Not just extracurriculars but major status symbols. A dual degree would likely make these more difficult to do (they're really time consuming), but then again I've seen dual degree students excel in them, so it can be done. As everyone has noted, it depends a lot on what you plan to end up doing. There were times when I overextended myself during law school and my grades suffered. Law grades carry a lot more weight than college grades. So I don't want to minimize the importance of keeping it simple in every way you can. I assume you're interested in the sort of jobs an MPA might lead to if you're even considering the dual degree. But Gramarye is absolutely right-- if what you're looking for is legal work, you're better off focusing on being the best law student you can be. Law firms are looking for law geeks, they're not all that interested in the breadth of your knowledge.

I love this idea and hope to see it flourish.

I really hope they distinguish between cheap woodframe houses and higher-end brick structures, doing far less demo on the latter. Much of Ohio's previous demo work decimated the main streets and left the sidestreets relatively untouched.