Foraker

Criticism of Amtrak's new engines as being heavier and slower than necessary. Some of the commenters to the story strongly disagree, however. http://observer.com/2013/07/amtraks-fat-expensive-and-slow-new-northeast-corridor-locomotives-arrive-for-testing/

OK, putting aside for a bit whether this new roadway will provide "opportunity" for the neighborhood, what about the maintenance cost: We ought to be looking at both the cost of construction and maintenance costs and finding funding for the total cost before moving forward.

My understanding is that the Union Club owns the lot and the upper surface was structurally unstable. So they tore it out and connected the former basement to their too-small parking garage. Unrelated to whatever is going on with the adjacent building's facade.

Airline "infrastructure" includes air traffic controllers and radar. The airlines (and passengers) pay for use of the airports, all taxpayers pay for the air traffic controllers. The public (port authority) also takes on the risk in building an airport in anticipation of airlines wanting to use it. Despite that support, every major airline has gone through bankruptcy at least once, and the entire industry was bailed out after 9/11. Amtrak also operates on privately-owned rail and pays "rent" for using those lines. Amtrak owns very little track of its own. The freight rail companies gladly sold their passenger business to Amtrak. The port authority also does not build passenger rail stations for Amtrak to rent...

Answer: Feeder rail systems from Cincinnati/OH, Lexington and Louisville to CVG. That is a pipe-dream if there ever was one. Why should either Lexington, Louisville, or anywhere else be interested in a rail feeder system to CVG? Are you also including Indianapolis and Columbus? Sometimes you rail advocates are just plain [ridiculous]. Think it through; I think it makes more sense than you give it credit for. CVG has a lot to offer. It has a lot of room for lots of runways, plenty of room for expansion, and is centrally located between Cincinnati, Lexington, and Louisville. (Contrast it with the landlocked airport in Cleveland, where just expanding a runway is a major headache.) But the Cincinnati area doesn't have the traveling population to support a lot of flights. So if the problem is needing more people to fill flights, how do we get more people to CVG? CVG is the "Cincinnati" airport, but it's pretty far from a lot of Cincinnati and its suburbs. How does CVG get more passengers? Make it easier to get to the airport, and encourage more airlines (competition) to fly there. Ultimately, cost and convenience are what are going to bring more passengers to CVG. Adding more lanes to the highway won't make it more convenient for passengers from Lexington and Louisville, but a train might. I wouldn't want to drive several hours to another airport for every flight, but if I can get on the train and read or text or watch a movie, and have a whiskey or beer while I ride to the airport, that would be easy. Just look at all the comments above about people driving or not driving to other airports because of the cost. Why would Lexington and Louisville want to undercut their airports and divert passengers to CVG? Each of the respective airports are pretty insignificant in any one airline's plans right now. The people want choice, they want competition, they want lower prices -- but they can't get there on their own. I don't expect Lexington or Louisville to lift a finger to help get a train line started, however. We could say that a train could increase traffic to their city, but if they're not paying for it I expect CVG or the port authority or whoever starts up a rail line would put the terminus in the suburbs and the other terminus at CVG by the terminal. Build a station and a parking lot at the end, and you just park your car and take the train to the airport (you could call it an airport shuttle). CVG could make money from the parking lot, the rail trip, and add flight passengers. More passengers and maybe CVG gets an airline's interest in being a hub again, or it draws more airlines into CVG to serve all those added passengers. Having a rail line might also increase traffic to Lexington and Louisville. Competition again. It could work. Don't be so dismissive; it's not so clear that this is an idea not even worth considering.

Answer: Feeder rail systems from Cincinnati/OH, Lexington and Louisville to CVG.

I'm not as pessimistic about EC's motives here (maybe I am naive). I think they're just broke, and there is no help on the horizon. The county or state should work with EC and help them (and insist that they do so) start to negotiate a merger with CH and Cleveland. Maybe up-the-hill portion to CH and down-the-hill to Cleveland. Better for EC to be involved in discussion about how and where they merge now, before the budget further implodes.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Senate-confirms-two-Amtrak-board-members--34649

Given the parking garages, I agree that we cannot completely close the street to cars. But it would be a huge pedestrian improvement to close the street to through traffic or make it one-way and widen the sidewalks. Parkworks would be a great resource for a trial of different ways of improving the pedestrian environment here.

Obviously, we need to build more passenger train routes between airline hubs and smaller cities to maintain sufficient capacity at the smaller hubs. The airlines should be lobbying for it. Whoever figures this out first could be a big winner. Imagine rail lines from Dayton through Cincinnati, Indianapolis?, Lexington, and Louisville into CVG. Suddenly CVG could be a powerhouse in the midwest.

I can't find the article now, but Pittsburgh adopted a land tax and phased it in over time. Buildings ("improvements" to the land) are still taxed, but at a lower rate than the tax on the land itself. I don't know of any reason why Cuyahoga County couldn't do the same. According to Wikipedia, Pittsburgh scrapped the land tax for a traditional property tax in 2001, but kept it in part of the city only (downtown?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax_in_the_United_States

Unfortunately, I will be surprised if the diners can ever be successful in their current location, a long walk north of Cedar and set back from the street. Cleveland Heights has been more successful in the business districts with small businesses and a walkable pedestrian feel, with lots of housing nearby, than it has in an auto-centric let's-hope-people-drive-to-our-store area like Severance. People I know in CH talk about how they like being able to walk up the street to the bars, restaurants, and nightlife. Driving to Home Depot in Severance is described as a hassle. These business districts and CH's location relative to University Circle, the Clinic and downtown balance out some of the higher taxes and older housing, and I think that is why CH has been mostly successful in the past twenty years. South Euclid isn't that far away and is definitely taking the auto-centric approach, so we'll be able to compare how each city does over the next twenty years. Getting back to the diners -- because they do not add to the pedestrian experience due to the set-back from the street, and the separation from the main Cedar-Lee business district, I don't think they will be able to attract enough patrons on a consistent enough basis to survive. Here's to hoping I'm wrong about that.

Hope it turns out well. Fran Mench wasn't the only one protesting this project, but she did put together an interesting report of the large number of rental vacancies and housing foreclosures in the immediate area that left me with some doubts. Let's hope that those rentals and foreclosures are only vacant because they aren't "new, modern" and lacked central air. If this project is successful, then it might be seen as a signal that CH needs to accelerate foreclosure demolitions so that more new, modern, and air-conditioned buildings can be built in their place. While I can see a place for more modern housing in CH, I also would like to see more modern office space in CH to balance out all of the residential and provide a livelier daytime presence in that stretch of Lee Rd.

Frankly I'd like to see closer access to the water than such a tall bulkhead provides. Maybe something along the lines of the stepped Serpentine Wall along the Ohio River in Cincinnati. http://mjhansonphotography.com/keyword/cincinnati/855725976_aksdx#!i=855725976&k=4s665PG Here's another photo with higher river level. http://www.ohioswallow.com/gallery/image/314

Sound like a great idea, perhaps the Port Authority could assist with funding.

Can we get a refresher on the different infrastructure of light rail vs. commuter rail. Commuter rail is heavier, which I expect means you need different support for the rails. Also I expect that light rail is typically electric, powered by overhead catenary lines, whereas a commuter rail would be a diesel-electric hybrid. Is the rail spacing different? Other distinctions? I seem to recall that commuter rail requires a higher floor than light rail -- is that so? Why? I'm asking to better understand what would be required to convert our system to a uniform type of car. Are there legal/political factors related to operating beside freight rail lines that would keep us from moving away from commuter rail? Would light rail tracks need to be spaced further or further separated (concrete divider) from freight tracks?

Although "lawns" are not necessary, some buffer is needed between the first-floor apartments and the sidewalk, and I actually think they did a good job with the plantings on the side facing Chester.

Check out this blog, and search for "focused lights" http://www.thelazyrandonneur.com/

Make that "roads will be in even worse shape in coming years and some lesser-used roads [will/should] close due to lack of funding."

I think we are all hoping that the "pedestal" creates room for tracks underneath the casino's Phase II. The devil is in the details

I'm equally eager to get something built here, both to compensate the city for the boatload of money already invested in acquiring the land and in building the parking garage. And I have no objections to tax abatements if necessary to ensure the developer will proceed. I agree that adding new apartments to the Cedar-Lee neighborhood would add another housing option, but I would like to see this project include class A office space, which is in short supply in the city, and would give this area a little life during the day. Has this option been considered? Does anyone else see this as a helpful diversification of the tax base?

A case for more trains, with the Midwest Hub as an example. http://newurbanismblog.com/lowspeed-rail/

Oakwood wasn't on and off the market for as long as Acacia has been. We don't know all the details yet, but I wonder whether the terms of the deal allow the golf course to remain, temporarily or permanently.

But just think how much exponentially more innovation would have occurred without the medical device excise tax!

Nicki Minaj concert.