natininja

Uhm, I think you mean Skittles. Taste the rainbow! Those look yummy.

My friend Shadowhare sent me here. Do you know him, rockandroller?

Ohai. I'm new here. I'm a ninja from the Nati. Hence the name. :wink2:

That is nice, ResCon. I think we really need to get all this info into one place, hyperlinked together, so that it is in a small, digestable package on the surface, but if someone is interested in details (such as those suggestions you just laid out), they can just click a well-placed/well-labeled hyperlink and find all the information they want to know about a specific issue. Organization is key, as is presentation. It needs to look professional and thorough. We need to work together on this stuff, not argue about it. I'd like to hear Randy's input on all of this.

Randy, I don't think his tactics fail if there is no corruption going on. While he may be a bit quick to make accusations, the idea that VBML's/condemnations aren't being used the way they were meant to be and the possibility that HUD would disapprove are weighty and legitimate concerns, as they stand. It seems pretty indisputable that these procedures are not used in the way they were meant to be used. Why not bring it to legal challenge, and let the courts decide if things go further than just "not the way it's supposed to be" and into "illegal"? I see nothing wrong with letting "the system" have its say in the matter. All of that is totally independent of accusations of corruption.

I think there's room for both tactics. Randy, I think you mentioned designing some stuff to circulate highlighting the problem. I think that's a great idea. Maybe we should start a thread, and brainstorm on what to include. Pictures, I think, are essential. If I had more time and webdesign skills, I'd make a first draft of the whole deal myself...maybe I will do it anyway in a PDF or something. Some ideas: Show pictures of properties which most definitely should not be torn down. Example (via ResCons's blog): (Can't get the img mark-up to work.) (I think this one is very effective, in particular, as it really highlights context.) Next, show pics that exemplify what these buildings could look like, i.e. blocks around Findlay Market. Another thing would be to highlight how much progress has been made, say in the Gateway Quarter, in such a short time. Explain the city's tactics: the too-fast VBML/condemn orders, the lack of incentives for restoration, etc. Give alternative suggestions for what the city's policies could be. Try to highlight why Cincy's building stock is unique (in ways that don't bore people not so concerned with historic detail), what good shape most of the building stock is actually in, and how tearing our history down can't be reversed. This could rally people to ResCon's cause, as well as drum up sympathy among residents, business owners, and politicians. Another pie-in-the-sky idea I've had is pitching to P&G the possibility of making a "P&G Village" in OTR, in the vein of GE's "Village" near their Evendale plant. It's very farfetched, but someone with that kind of money needs to get into the OTR preservation business if things are really going to get better in a time frame that prevents demolition. 3CDC is nice, but not enough. One thing is for sure: we need action. Bullsh!tting on a forum is all well and good, but the energy needs to be channeled further. (And for this, I thank ResCon for truly creating some momentum!)

Every time I look at this thread, I just want to cry. Such a downer...I can hardly bear thinking about it.

I understand what you mean, but I think CUT is the best possible place for 3C to go. It would ensure an extension of the streetcar route, and ensure regular travel upon it. The CBD doesn't need the potential development that a new line and new people-traffic into OTR could bring. Leave the Transit Center for light rail! It does feel like a bit of an island there, but as an entrance to the city it has some advantages. The main one is just being a sexy little piece of architecture. That can go a long way in taking people's minds off the fact that they're not right downtown. Another idea to alleviate the isolation feeling: if they get a free ride to Fountain Square (or they could get off somewhere in between) with the purchase of their 3C ticket, I think no one would be bothered by the situation.

Most young people, yes. That's something people do in their 20s and it tails off after that. Mainly because people then have families with kids. "Crashing" is also a little less appropriate for a mid-week business trip. And day trips among the 3C's for business are pretty common. But they're highly impractical with the travel times we're hearing about for this startup service, and that will take away a ton of the market. I see this being used a lot for weekend excursions, and during the week by people who work from computer and largely make their own schedules. I don't see a whole lot more market for it, other than cannibalizing Grayhound's market, which is allright by me. For one, I don't think the schedule is set in stone. You can't criticize the project over a detail that can be changed on a whim. For two, it would just be necessary for any meetings to be scheduled in the window of time available to those taking part in the meeting. Yes, it could be a problem in some cases. It's also true that the local business communities could throw their weight around to create a train schedule which suits their needs. As for leisure travelers, it is limiting, but I think a significant proportion of these travelers plan to stay with a friend (regardless of how they are traveling) when they travel between these cities. Frankly, I would bet the most cited reason (non-business) to go from one to another would be to visit friends. I know my parents only to Cleveland only to visit their friends. They're most certainly not in their 20's. (I know it's anecdotal, but I don't think this is uncommon. Other reasons for people to leisure-travel within Ohio also fade after one's 20's, I would bet. At least as things are, currently.) But in terms of the existence of the service inspiring someone to take a trip and explore one of the cities, which I believe is a noble and achievable goal, the schedule is an issue. It's also limiting for people deciding to, on a whim, go to one of the cities. If someone in Columbus is thinking about how to spend their evening, and they decide to go to a Reds game, it's unlikely they will just call up a friend at a moment's notice and ask to stay the night. (And that's particularly demographically sensitive, as this might be socially appropriate for, say, a university student, but less so for anyone much older.)

Actually, I think a non-negligible portion of the people riding the train will have a friend's place to crash at. That would also be relevant when thinking about "oh noes, they are getting dumped in a city center with no way of getting anywhere!" When I think about this rail service, I immediately think of all the times I used to drive from Cincy to Cbus (or occasionally take the Greyhound) when I had lots of friends going to OSU. Many of those friends were from Cincy, Dayton, and Cleveland, and would travel to visit their parents frequently. I also think about my parents' annual trips from Cincy to visit their friends in Cleveland. Am I crazy to think that most people from the 3C's+D know someone whose place they can crash at in most of those cities? As for business trips, it's an issue, but if it's just for one meeting, the meetings can of course be scheduled at an opportune time, in most cases. Business, unlike entertainment, generally happens during the day, anyway.

That's not true, what 327 is highlighting is that we'll be playing catch up forever with the way things are now. Sure it's great that we're getting started with something, but we're decades behind most places already and we needed a game changer in order to actually catch up. Unfortunately not only did we not receive that game changer, but we didn't even ask for it. By the time we get 110mph service in place most other highly populated urban corridors in this nation will have far better service with faster travel speeds, higher frequencies, better stations, and newer rolling stock. There is another possible scenario: since we'll be sitting out for a few years on the high-speed bandwagon, we'll have a chance to cherry-pick a better technology, when we finally do hop aboard (lol, pun). Allow others to test-pilot, and us to stand on the shoulders of giants. I know a lot of this has already been done across the world, I am just trying to look at a positive possibility. Who knows, maybe a massive jump in tech will be made in the next few years, and we will be lucky not to be working on an outdated while we watch other states starting up a whole new era of ultra-high-speed trains. For example, the Northeast Corridor is getting shafted now by being ahead of the game. If they were in our current position, they would probably be receiving more money than Cali and getting the best of the best. Instead, they are viewed as a fairly low priority, as they already have (popular!) service, but that service is (nearly?) impossible to upgrade to high speed.

What about this idea: Go ahead with the project as planned, as far as Dayton, and use the saved money to do it right. ("Right" as in not cutting corners, as has been suggested, due to less money than requested.) But promise Cincy that the next line built will be high speed from CVG (or at least CUT/Riverside Transit Center, since KY would have to jump on board for CVG) to Dayton? Is that, or a simple variation (say going to Sharonville initially) at all feasible?