natininja

Without the arcades, I doubt teens today spend as much time in malls.

I would think it would be difficult or impossible to seize their assets (infrastructure) and hand them off to someone else.

Duke customers need to put on the pressure. The company is getting away with this BS without any apparent threat of repercussions. They are really abusing their semi-monopolistic status. It's actually an interesting political/economic/business case study regarding the unique status of private utilities. They can throw political weight around with more impunity than your typical business in a capitalist society. Seems like the city might have been able to use leverage with the renewable energy aggregation deal, but then again that might not have been legal.

Looks like it just searches for posts with foul language, which you can then restrict, remove, whatever. Mostly useless, unless you're a kid.

*High-five!*

93. Might have found a new profession.

The money-maker: football. OSU changes their schedule to avoid playing UC. A UC-OSU annual match-up would be a huge money-maker. It would be a reality if OSU weren't afraid of losing.

Even with UC outside the Big 10, OSU is terrified of UC.

^Are you kidding? aOSU is terrified by the idea of UC threatening their dominance.

Silly, yes. But accurate? Lay off the acid...or something. Agreed.

^^ I think his point was exactly that the description was suitable. He found it interesting that an article skeptical of streetcars (which it seems like he is, too) described the Cincinnati streetcar as being essentially ideal. Edit: Furthermore, I think he found it somewhere between annoying and humorous (and possibly satisfactory as it was probably what he predicted would happen) that an article which would seem to support the streetcar was dismissed out of hand by supporters on this board. I admit I dismissed it. Without reading it. And I basically still do, and I still haven't read it. But that little nugget is interesting.

Have you seen them there before, though? They're there! Nice pic, btw.

I've seen black squirrels in EVD's hood, at Thompkins Square park.

Everyone should appreciate the Skyline time one.

"I'll bet we'll see the viaduct closed around Halloween and done and gone by Christmas." So you were off by about a month.

What's the combined population of downtown and uptown? Might be about 100k.

Nor did I. Guess I know where I'm going next vacay.

I will take that as recognition of the fact that all this rate increase coverage has been a propaganda bonanza in the media.

Thanks.

There was a PUCO staff report released recently which addressed the issue of Duke charging Cincinnati residents a different amount than other customers to pay for utility relocation. The staff said this should not fly, in part because of the network-structure of transportation projects. You improve the network in one place, you effectively improve it in all places. Keep in mind this is the Kasich administration making this argument. They also pointed to the fact that, if a system is expanded beyond the original boundaries, suddenly you have unfairly shifted the burden. Say a light rail line or network is built within HamCo and Duke charges HamCo residents for relocation expenses. Then a small spur is built into Butler. Even if Butler residents pay for utility work on this spur, suddenly Butler's Duke customers have received a huge subsidy from HamCo's Duke customers. While political boundaries are not perfect for decision making vs. cost distribution, PUCO has considered and ruled against what you are advocating, and they are not exactly known for being urban advocates. You might also want to consider the great extent to which Cincinnati residents subsidize suburban utility expansion.

Why isn't the city agreeing to pay for this cost? Seems like these utility relocation costs will be paid by Duke customers that live outside the city also? Seems like metro residents that live outside the city benefit from progress the city makes in revitalization also?

Bashing the streetcar in this context is probably better for the streetcar, in a bizarre way. The streetcar is a better line with an LRT connection. And separating the two conceptually is probably better for getting support for LRT in the county.

They still wont be making money because that is only operating costs. Capital projects is where most of the losses come, as is expected. If the highway stats include capital expenditures (and I assume that they must, since basically all they do is build and maintain the fixed capital) and the Amtrak stats don't, then that obviously changes the equation significantly. What percentage of Amtrak's *total* costs were covered by fares? (And if there's some other accounting magic separating out actual, tangible highway costs from the figures already discussed, I'd want to see the total costs of highways as well--still limited to direct costs, because indirect costs are more exercises in politics than economics, but all direct costs.) If I am not mistaken, much of the capital infrastructure for Amtrak is built by freight companies. There is a big reversal in roads-to-railroads comparison, where most of the public expenditure for roads is capital and most of the expenditure for railroads is operations. (Edit: And, likewise, operations are largely a private expenditure for roads, while infrastructure is the private expenditure for railroads.) So it's hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison. The northeast corridor is the only track I know of which is actually owned by Amtrak. If it were separated from the rest of Amtrak's operations, I would think it makes money even when capital expenditures are factored in.

Considering it's just 2.5 years away, nothing that isn't already in motion is likely to magically appear. More OTR development is something you might include. Mercer Commons will be complete, as well as some smaller projects.

Would be nice to amend the state constitution to allow eminent domain for negligent owners. Since they are disobeying laws for years on end, it seems fair to me. There needs to be some recourse for the government; allowing property owners to flout the law with impunity is insane.