Foraker

I disagree. For one, any lakeside parcel is going to be cold and windy in the winter -- easier access alone will not make it "really take off as a full year destination." Second, there is already convenient parking in the area, and for those of us who know about it it's not that hard to get to. The "underutilized and hard to find" problems could be addressed in other ways -- how about more marketing so that more people know about it and how to get to it, and better signage to help people get there and have ideas of where to go and what to do once they're there. I would also advertise the bike and pedestrian access, even though most Americans are loathe to walk further than the middle of a Walmart parking lot. Moreover, we have so little bike and pedestrian infrastructure, places where we can bike or walk without 3000-lb cars bearing down on us. We need more places where my five-year-old can ride his bike and wobble in independence, let's not add cars to the rare and beautiful bike/ped bridge at Wendy Park!

Unfortunately, the manufacturers and residents are all spread out. How many people in Maple Heights would ride a bus that goes by the Swagelok plant -- probably not enough to fill the bus, so how many stops would the bus have to make before stopping at Swagelok? Or would the bus also have to make multiple stops at different manufacturers to fill the bus? Now that we've added lots of stops to pick up passengers and drop off passengers, how long is that ride? Long enough that people would prefer to drive most likely. In the current development pattern, I don't foresee buses ever becoming competitive with personal cars. It will likely take decades, but if we want efficient transit from homes to manufacturing centers, we need to concentrate those manufacturers so that one or a few transit stops are all that are needed to reach a bunch of employers, and similarly we need to have denser population centers to support the other end of the transit line. That doesn't mean that we all need to live in a mini-downtown, but such mini-downtowns need to be spaced along transit lines so that there is a base of ridership.

Funny guy. Miami has a population of about 5.5 million at an average elevation of 6 feet above sea level. And they already have problems with streets flooding and seawater pushing sewage back into homes on a regular basis due to king tides. No storm required! No big deal. Thankfully Mar-a-Lago is a full 15 feet above sea level and hurricanes are rare in Florida. Whew. Pay no attention to the lying news. https://www.pnj.com/story/money/2023/07/12/florida-insurance-crisis-farmers-insurance-home-insurance-what-to-know/70407302007/ Martha's Vineyard has about 20,000 year-round residents, maybe 200,000 summertime residents (including President Obama?), and has an average elevation of 43 feet. Some of its towns/villages also have flooded following big storms. Definitely something to give you pause before moving there. https://governor.ohio.gov/media/news-and-media/governor-dewine-declares-state-of-emergency-in-four-southern-ohio-counties Good to know that Martha's Vineyard is more vulnerable to sea level rise than Miami, which surely will bail itself out (one bucket at a time) and would be a far better place for our investments.

I think there are quite a few "really smart people" who are uninformed about climate change or just choose not to "believe" in climate change. After all, the smartest guy in the world, our President Elect, and south Florida property owner, says it's a hoax. Watch the insurance companies, many of whom are exiting Florida or raising their rates significantly -- insurance costs might be what slows or halts construction in Miami in the future.

The streets will be flooding this week, the challenges they'll face in 80 years will be much greater https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/miami-florida-king-tides-explained-how-they-work-timing-and-more-21330441 I think you might be overly optimistic. The cost will be astronomical. https://www.businessinsider.com/miami-floods-sea-level-rise-solutions-2018-4

And yet, even in the authors' discussion of climate change they expect Miami to continue growing by 2100 -- while other studies indicate that Miami will be underwater by 2100. I have a hard time imagining both scenarios playing out. If Miami is mostly underwater, I would expect some pretty dramatic population decline (probably to another Florida city's advantage).

Seems like this building might be big enough for both a courthouse and more apartments. But here's hoping Millennia can at least get started -- start by removing the lead and asbestos. At least that way if they end up throwing up their hands and walking away then some other entity can start with a cleaner slate.

Thank you for providing examples of some Democrats who have problems with trans people in at least some situations. But I don't think those articles prove your point that "a lot" of the Left (exactly what do you mean -- are we including the Green Party?) has joined the "anti-trans hate train." That article quotes two Democratic Representatives (I'd say that they are moderates, not far-left) and a Texas Democratic party leader. That article also includes the following. In other words, while Democrats support many LGBTQ issues, that's not a high priority (while it is a high priority for the GOP to punch down). Bill Maher is a Libertarian. Liberal on some issues, very conservative on others. (And I would argue that he's been inconsistent on some issues over the years.) I think it would be hard to say that Bill Maher is representative of "the Left." That's a silly argument. First, let's remember the scale of this "problem" -- there are 10x the number of American Jews compared to the number of trans Americans. So with limited time, is this the most important issue to make sure you respond to in every instance? No. Second, would you say that Trump favors every issue that Harris raised that he "let go unanswered"? (What about issues he lied about, like not knowing anything about Project 2025?) I can tell you that I was part of the Left that was very disappointed in how Harris dealt with this issue, and a lot of other issues. Biden too. Here's an example of the Left disagreeing with the Center-Left. https://wlos.com/news/nation-world/aoc-responds-to-bidens-title-ix-rule-for-trans-athletes-indefensible-and-embarrassing-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-transgender-kids-children-sports Again, there is hate all across the spectrum, but it is FAR more common on the Right and rare on the Left. This is not a "both sides are equally bad" issue.

I feel for you Zagapi, there is a lot of hate and even well-meaning but hurtful misunderstanding out there. My sarcasm didn't come through in mocking the MAGA trick of hiding their hate behind "some people say" caveats. I don't dispute that there is hate all across the spectrum, but I do dispute TBideon's unfounded claim that "A lot" of the Left has joined the "anti-trans hate train." I haven't seen any proof of that and I challenge TBideon to provide a source.

Some people say that's not true.

And yet the GOP is full of the very people who will freak out when a transgender person follows them into a bathroom that does not correspond to their gender appearance.

Were there better options running for the position?

I'm going to have to retract that after this weekend. WTF. The final straw for me was punting on 4th and 1 with only six minutes left -- right after Michigan's 8-minute drive. If there was ever a time to go for it, that was it. If you didn't make it, your defense could hold there, or Michigan could score but we'd have gotten the ball back with some time on the clock. Punting at that point made no sense. If that was Day's call, I'm done supporting him.

As much as I like Ryan Day (seems like a nice guy who really cares about his players), I'm with you -- he should be demoted to QB coach and let someone else lead. There's no way he should be calling plays.

You know how Republicans feel about business regulation, right? Huffman must have been joking.

Except, the article does provide some solutions -- and the Democrats actually have pushed for many of these ideas (particularly the often-derided Progressives, in contrast to the neoliberals like Bill Clinton). So it's not that none of our leaders have anything meaningful to say to Midwesterners. But yeah, the Republican Party opposes pretty much every one of these ideas, so we can expect none will advance under the new administration and in fact they plan to reverse all of Biden's policies that moved in those directions.

That reminds me of an upcoming loss for Northeast Ohio -- after years of delay, Rebecca Lutzko was finally appointed as our US Attorney in June 2023. By all accounts she's been great. With the change in administration, Trump will undoubtedly ask for her resignation (this is routine). Let's see how long it takes to get a replacement. Unfortunately, based on his cabinet picks it will undoubtedly be someone with stronger political puckering than prosecutorial experience.

I'm still not convinced that the weather in Columbus, Ohio, makes cycling impossible. Cycling happens in the winter in countries with worse weather. How about Finland? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU I also wasn't saying that everyone should be cycling instead of driving a car. The point is that it should be an option, even if I would never expect my grandmother to choose it. My comment was limited to the weather, but I agree with you that nearly 100 years of building-for-the-car makes low-density America ill-suited for large numbers of people taking up cycling. But it's not as impossible as you might think. The Netherlands itself was full of cars and sprawling development (not as sprawling as in the US, but lots of new construction on the outskirts of the cities) in the 1950s and 1960s. Many of the beautiful plazas were parking lots. Some of the canals were filled in to add roadways. It wasn't until the 1970s that The Netherlands made a conscious decision to restrict cars in city centers and promote cycling. Even then, it took multiple decades to get from there to now. https://inkspire.org/post/amsterdam-was-a-car-loving-city-in-the-1970s-what-changed/ I continue to reject the idea that it can't happen here. This is America -- we can accomplish anything that we put our mind to! The US, and Columbus, could work to change the transportation priorities between and within more-densely-built neighborhoods. Put parking garages on the outskirts of Polaris (and German Village) (not unlike within OSU's campus) and only allow deliveries and buses into the built-up areas, reduce road widths, add walking and cycling paths, add more apartment, condo, and townhouses to bring in more people. The result would be a Polaris that is a much nicer community to live in and visit.

Totally. Can you imagine biking in a more northern country, like say, The Netherlands -- forget it. 🙄 It's not the climate. It's the infrastructure and an inability to imagine something new and different. You can plow and salt bike paths just as easily as you can roadways, there are studded winter tires for bikes, covered bike parking, and on and on -- it's sad that we continue to build for cars and then whinge "it can't be done here" when anyone asks for an alternative.

Agreed -- I'd rather fill all the Warehouse District parking lots with 6-8 story mid-rise buildings than just one more tower. If we were down to just one lot, then yeah, maybe a tower would make more sense. But we have a sea of parking to fill.

And remarkably, they're still smoking the Hyperloop pipe! https://www.eneo2050.com/total

NOACA is conducting another survey. Seems to be interested in more roadways and autonomous transit routes. https://www.eneo2050.com/future-scenarios

There's no way to make car-dependent transportation affordable for everyone. https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/132752-planning-true-transportation-affordability-beyond-common-misconceptions Cities that pro-actively change their mindset and reduce lane-miles of roadway and surface parking, and heavily subsidize transit so that residents can meet their daily needs without a car, will more likely be affordable places to live.

I don't doubt that there would be a lot of NIMBYS today, but I still think we need to start advocating for BRT on Cedar. "No way" to even think about it is defeatist and means it definitely would never happen -- but it's a good idea that deserves to be promoted even if implementation (and convincing sufficient YIMBYs) is still decades away. "The locals" in Cleveland Heights may have a completely different mindset around cars than the locals in Beachwood, but I don't think CH by itself would ever convince RTA to fund a BRT line that ends at Taylor -- if Beachwood Mall would add some housing and park space it might thrive and become a destination again.

With those spaced "major destinations" along Cedar, this route looks ripe for BRT -- Cleveland Heights, University Heights, South Euclid, Beachwood -- get together and petition RTA and join together for startup funding!