OHSnap

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2012/08/advice-passing-massive-infrastructure-referendum/2945/

Right, they obviously have to bridge the creek. The curious part is that they are breaching the brand-new flood wall and moving it slightly north, even farther from the creek than it already was. And I know they're realigning Duck Creek Rd., but from what I'm seeing, they'll have to fly it over ~8 ft of flood wall if the wall is going to continue to do its job. I'll wait to see how it all plays out, and I wouldn't be surprised if what they're doing now is temporary, but it just seems a strange way to go about things - build the wall, breach the wall, move the wall, build a new road over the wall.

One might argue that the Enquirer has been dropping the questions from its stories for years.

I didn't get any pictures, but the Kennedy Connector work did in fact have to breach the flood wall the Army Corps just built. They're driving new steel plates (for lack of a better word) into the ground about 5-10 feet closer to Duck Creek at Kennedy. These are the same sort of plates that were driven and then encased in concrete for the original flood wall.

^ I said that in my post, and that's beside the point. I never said those jobs were in Cincinnati, and I never said it was a good idea for the city to own Blue Ash Airport anymore. My argument was simply that John Schneider was using the $40,000 figure to try to illustrate the sum value of the airport to the local economy. My point is that it's much larger than that, and many of those 75 employees will lose their jobs. Whether they live in Cincinnati, Blue Ash, West Chester, or Newport, I think we can all agree that the loss of numerous jobs is a bigger impact on the region than John's quote of $40,000 in revenue that accrues directly to the city.

I haven't driven by the airport in some time, but just because the airport is not controlled does not mean there are no jobs. There's a fixed base operator. There's a flight school. These are private enterprises located on the airport. These, in addition to the city crews that mow the grass and replace the lights, and other on-airport jobs, make up part of the 75 jobs. Then you have the impacts generated by visitors - a part of hotel and restaurant business in that area is due to the airport. Factor in the multiplier effect (fractions of jobs generated by businesses that serve the businesses on airport and at the hotels and restaurants, and the businesses that serve those businesses, etc.) and you get your 75 jobs. This is all accepted economic impact analysis methodology. And they probably wouldn't transfer to Lunken. Those private businesses have been there for years and wouldn't have a place on Lunken because of the competition that already exists there. In all likelihood, the on-airport jobs at Blue Ash will simply disappear.

With all due respect to your knowledge of the inner workings of the streetcar and the esteem which I hold for you on that subject, I wish you'd stop tossing around the $40,000 figure to somehow illustrate the value of Blue Ash Airport. As I said up thread, the income the city receives from the airport is only a small part of the value of the airport to the local economy. In 2006, Wilbur Smith Associates - an independent consulting firm that has produced more economic impact studies of airports than any other firm in the country - published a report stating that Blue Ash Airport is responsible for 75 jobs producing in excess of $7m in economic output. Your point in response was that little of that impact accrues to the city of Cincinnati, and that's probably true. But those jobs are local and the majority of that output stays in the metro area. Those on-airport businesses also pay income and property taxes, and the employees pay income tax, and their sales generate sales tax. These are locally-owned businesses employing local workers. By your logic, no municipality should ever build the road networks within an industrial park because those roads don't directly generate income to the municipality, and in fact cost money to maintain. You can't forget about the businesses that locate along those roads, though, which is what you seem to do with the businesses on Blue Ash Airport. Please don't try to portray the airport as strictly a $40,000 per year concern. The people that work on the airport and its allied businesses deserve better.

Move there for our new suburban-style "lifestyle center" instead! Easier highway access! Acres of parking!

Let me be clear up front - I think the city selling ISZ is a good idea. It was underutilized and has a higher and better use at this point in its life. However, there are a few issues that I'm sure played into the length of time it took to get to this point: 1) Grant assurances - If FAA funded any projects at the airport, they have to stay in use at the airport for 20 years. (This is the issue noted above that required re-structuring the deal.) Pavement, equipment, navaids, etc., would have to stay in aviation use, otherwise their pro-rated costs would need to be repaid to the FAA. 2) Once an airport closes, it will never be reactivated. As a result, the FAA and city needed to be absolutely sure they would never want the airport again. The closure would have to be included in the state's and city's system plans, which are usually years in the making. 3) I'm not sure of the history of projects at ISZ, nor am I educated on how the operating budgets at ISZ and LUK are compiled, but it's likely that either ISZ didn't cost $40k per year to maintain, or there was a small amount of cross-subsidy from LUK's revenue. ISZ probably only needed lawnmowing and some incidentals. The labor was probably provided part-time by DOTE workers employed in various capacities. There would be some utility charges and basic lighting maintenance, again provided by other DOTE functions. Pavement maintenance and re-striping are FAA eligible and need only a 10% local match. As for the "no economic benefit" comment, it's true that many Cincinnatians probably don't even know the airport exists. The $40k gross income to the city is misleading, however - there are several businesses involved in commerce and which employ workers. As of 2006, it was 75 employees making $2m per year and generating $7m in output (primary and multiplier impacts). Then you get into nebulous concepts like expedited access to the national air transport system that are hard to put a dollar figure on, but will be affected by its closure. Many people think an airport like ISZ or Sporty's are a playground for the rich - and in part they are - but they nevertheless provide economic benefit. Is it the same as a business park on the same land in the heart of Blue Ash? No. But it's a positive number.

^ A slice of Eastgate, right downtown! Awesome!

^ And that's the type of stupidity that's going to set back the movement. I lost count of the red lights run (in front of cops!), door zones, pinch points, high-speed near-misses with pedestrians, and instances of general idiocy. First time one of these alleycats mows down a pedestrian or murders himself hitting a mirror or dumpster and it'll be all over the news. And the comment boards will light up with people condemning cyclists, in this case correctly. And by extension, those of us working for a culture that presents cycling as a compatible use will be lumped together with them. Car drivers who are just starting to come around to sharing the road with us will once again view us as threatening, unsafe, competing uses and we'll be back to square one. Drag racing cars is illegal because it's crazy dangerous. This is the exact same. We as cyclists are just starting to make inroads on the streets-are-for-cars-only mentality. This crap will only hurt us.

My understanding is that the re-striping of Riverside (or at least the preparation thereof) is already underway, in a one-mile section leading west from the base of Delta Ave. I chatted with some people close to Queen City Bike on a ride last weekend. If I have my details correct, from the north side of the street to the south, there will be a parking lane, westbound bike lane, westbound traffic lane, eastbound traffic lane, and finally eastbound bike lane. The traffic lanes will also be narrower for calming. It'll be done in sections to get drivers, residents, and cyclists used to the idea. If you drive on Riverside you might see some preliminary surveying-type markings and areas highlighted for repair. That was last Friday, so perhaps it's further along by now. EDIT: Now I see Cygnus' post, which makes most of mine redundant. My understanding is no center turn lane, though, but a lane for parking instead. We'll see what the final outcome is though.

^ not sure if there's sarcasm there, but I'll address it anyway-- I'm less familiar with the site, but on the surface it's probably big enough, but the runways are the wrong orientation. It still appears to have rail lines crossing the property, but I'm unaware of whether they're active. Other than that, the same flaws 1-6 as above. In fact, they hold for just about any consolidated airport, or frankly for any new airport period. Some useful case studies could be found in the as-yet-unbuilt south suburban airport in Peotone, IL, MidAmerica in Belleville, IL, Dade-Collier TNT Airport between Miami and Ft. Myers, the struggle to build a new airport in San Diego (a cross-border airport!), etc. About the only example of a brand new airport in the last 30 years in the US that has been successful is DEN, and they had to go miles outside of the city to get the right location. DFW is an obvious comparison, but there was a false start with Greater Southwest International for twenty years, Love Field was tied up in the courts for decades, and Fort Worth would still like air service to return to Meacham. The only reason DFW got done was that the FAA and CAB told Dallas and Fort Worth that it would no longer fund both Love and Meacham, and instructed them to build a new airport (never mind that neither ever closed and the FAA still funds both). As far as I know, FAA has no problem with CVG and DAY as-is. I understand this thread is not about actually proposing a new airport for the Cincinnati-Dayton region, and that the larger issue here isn't access to airports but the relative weakness of what already exists. But it's a good idea to keep in mind exactly how high the hurdles are.

^ not to mention, there's not enough space at the Correctional Institute site. You'd need north-south alignment for proper wind coverage, and those rail lines along the southern edge are the very thing constraining the site. Rail lines are exceedingly expensive to move, and require their own environmental review, assuming the track owners are amenable to moving. There are also high-tension power lines immediately north, which constitute a hazard to navigation and would penetrate the Part 77 surfaces, and are probably even more expensive to relocate. And you'd need to relocate Route 63 about a mile north to fit in a 10,000 foot runway. And this is all predicated by (1) the state being willing to move the prison, (2) Mason, Middletown, Lebanon, Springboro, et al. being amenable to an air traffic pattern overhead, (3) property owners of and the golf course at Shaker Run selling, (4) electing a governor and legislators willing to consolidate two fully-built airports into one at considerable expense, (5) getting the grant assurances at CVG and DAY repaid or revoked so the properties can be sold (don't forget the third runway at CVG opened in 2005, and the DAY tower opened last year, and thus must be kept operating until 2025/2031, or the pro rated construction costs must be repaid), (6) convincing the airlines that it's a good idea and retain service at an unproven location. In other words, it's not impossible, but it's extremely improbable.

Having worked in the airport business for a number of years, I have just one question: don't you think that CVG management has done exactly this? For years CVG was beholden to Delta's whims because Delta (and to a lesser extent, DHL) paid the bills. It was not in CVG's interest to pursue other carriers because of the Delta honey pot that was already there. It's like owning a shopping center where your major tenant (and 90% of your rent) is Home Depot. Do you risk pissing off Home Depot by making pitches to Lowe's? So then the low-fare carriers go to airports all around Cincinnati to pick off some of CVG's customers. Perfectly legitimate form of competition, and now those carriers do a good business at those airports and would only be diluting existing demand if they add CVG now. They would have never been able to compete with DL directly at CVG, so they went around it. But the airline business being what it is, an extremely solid business case must be made for any airline to add a any city. Scores of cities have tried grants, loans, fare guarantees, covering operating expenses, providing ground staff, even wet-leasing aircraft for the airline to use, almost all with terrible results. It's easy to say "CVG management go make a pitch to Southwest and Airtran and Jet Blue," and in fact there are whole annual conventions set up where airport managers from all over the country can sit down with the airlines to pitch their cities. The reality is that it's extremely difficult to get an airline to take a gamble on starting service to a new city. Keep in mind too that DL with 70 daily frequencies is still nothing to trifle with. Southwest might even love to give us Chicago, but DL already serves it (as does AA and UA) and would just match the price and let SkyMiles do the rest. And do you really think pro-business, anti-regulation Kasich will issue some empty threats of building a huge regional airport with money we don't have on land we don't own? Never mind that in this day and age it takes decades to get a major new airport built (ask Peotone, IL), by which time DL will do whatever it darn well pleases anyway. Take a moment to think about the reality of this business. Airline margins under deregulation have always been razor-thin, and more often non-existent. One extra full seat often means the difference between a profitable flight versus a loss. We can demand all we want but if conditions aren't exactly right, an airline simply won't supply it, incentives or not.

^ Saw this on your site last night. Amazing park and photos. Nice work.

^ What he said. Cranley might huff and puff in the leadup to the 2013 election, but we have to remember a few things: 1) That's 17 months away. If I recall, we'll be about 12 months past the selection of contractors at that point, and work will be well underway. There will likely be tangible signs that the streetcar is coming. 2) We just had an election which turned out most of the anti-streetcar members of council. It would take three new or returning anti-streetcar members, in addition to Cranley as mayor, to get the votes to stop the project. 3) I dare say that additional debate and rabble-rousing on the streetcar would invoke voter fatigue with the issue. We defeated two ballot initiatives and turned out anti-streetcar council members last time. If that's not indication that the votes are with us, I don't know what is. I know much could change with the electorate in 18 months, and I'm not counting my chickens yet. Cranley can huff and puff and score points in Westwood and Cheviot on the issue, but it does feel like we're past the tipping point here.

Barnes and Noble and B-B-B are each within two exits off I-71. Urban Outfitters might do well, but they're not a big box, and I think they do a pretty good business down at UC. Kohl's seems like they prefer the far suburbs these days. Big boxes within a few miles of Oakley Station: Target Meijer Sam's PetSmart Home Depot Lowe's Wal-Mart Bed, Bath, Beyond DSW Kroger (x2 if we count Norwood, three if you count the one that went out at Kenwood) Bigg's x2 Whole Foods REI (coming) Nordstrom Kohl's Sears Macy's Barnes & Noble Dick's Toys R Us Old Navy x2 LA Fitness Urban Active x2 Crate & Barrel Container Store Nordstrom Rack Stein Mart Joseph-Beth Plus dozens more that I'm either forgetting or arbitrarily decided didn't count as big boxes. In other words, if it's a chain established in the Midwest, it's pretty much already covered - except Best Buy.

Kennedy Connector Update: Tree clearing adjacent to Ibsen and Ridge (On the site of the old Precision Automation) is largely complete. A few remaining buildings where the Lateral/71-S ramps split off of Ridge are mostly down. I think just one house remains on Ibsen west of Ridge. Temporary relocation of Duck Creek Road about 50 feet north is moving along quickly. It's been awhile since I was [the street spelled D-I-S-N-E-Y, apparently the forum deletes that word] behind the Target/Sam's area where Cinemark will go, but last I checked a week or two ago it still looked like soil remediation was ongoing. The rest of the site is still being cleared of demolition debris. Site prep some time off still.

Yeah, I harbor no illusions that the retail/restaurant parts will be full before 2020. The Target across the street is the highest-grossing in the city, and all the other big boxes in the area do well. Aside from a Best Buy or a Kroger Marketplace (despite the success of the Hyde Park Kroger, I can see them wanting to expand the concept in the area), I can't think of what else would go there that isn't already nearby. And according to the renderings, I don't see a footbridge. I'd love to know how many parking spaces exist between this development, Crossroads, and the whole of the Center of Cincinnati. It's gotta be 5,000. And to look at old aerials of when it was all Milacron and see that there were relatively few spaces despite it being one of the leading employers in the city. Shows you how far we've fallen as a culture. I think the station is on the other side of the tracks from this development. In this rendering, it's at bottom, just right of center: http://www.oakley-station.com/asp/page.asp?ID=1072

I have to get up to Cleveland Clinic a couple times a year, and door to door it is 4:00 at 250 miles. I schedule the appointments for midday and make it round trip during daylight hours. Five hours means you're averaging 50 mph. On the other topic of CVG-CLE flights, business travelers no doubt like it, but when you factor in the 1.5 hour flight plus being at the airport one hour early, plus time to clear the airport and rent a car, you're talking three hours door to door. If one drives, you can go on your own schedule, listen to whatever you want in the car, and avoid all the lines and TSA theater, all for just an hour more. Plus save, what, $400? The economics no longer work out. When I used to travel for work, even Nashville, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and points in between at 5 hours were drive markets.

^alright, well that I didn't know. I humbly retract my cynicism. Still curious to see how they'll resolve the floodwall issue.

How badly was Issue 11 defeated in 1998? I was away at college at the time and don't remember the details.

Seriously. Did they not know about the Kennedy Connector, or did they just say, "Screw it, it's not our problem"? My guess would be the latter. Coulda had something to do with Jeanne Schmidt. She trumpeted the news of that project a few years back. Best as I can tell it protects ILSCO (a campaign contributor of hers) and little else. If I remember correctly, the contractor that did the work was from Kentucky, so it wasn't a "Jobs For Jeanne's District" thing, either. Inconsequential is that in the seven years I've lived nearby, the creek was never once out of its channel, even through hurricane remnants and rains that flooded my basement. And that the same amount of money that was spent on the wall probably could have moved ILSCO to a new facility on higher ground. So the good news is that the Kennedy Connector probably won't affect the wall since it seems largely superfluous anyway.

Let me Google that for me... http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/transeng/downloads/transeng_eps37192.pdf http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120521/NEWS/305210018/Work-Kennedy-Connector-starts-today