gildone

It's not Skybus's fault, and it's not entirely the fault of those leading the Hub plan. It's the mindset of elected officials. They are all very familiar with the Ohio Hub plan and the EIS. We've spent decades investing in aviation and highways and ignoring rail. Passenger rail just isn't part of people's lives anymore, so they just don't think about it. Elected officials should know better, because it's their job to (my opinion...) but they don't. Personally, I think ORDC should take the lead in rounding up the funds from Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinnati, Toledo, Youngstown, and the major corporate movers and shakers in those cities to get the funds. Heck, if the corporate class in Columbus could find the money to build the Blue Jackets arena after the ballot issue to pay for it went down in flames, they could come up with a few hundred thousand to kick in for the EIS.

It's good to see that even smaller cities are starting to think about New Urbanism in their downtowns. This is an appropriate use for the Trans. for Liveable Communities grant-- not like Brunswick which tried to get one for a road improvement project.

They'll cough up $57 million for a single airline, but won't contribute something toward a lousy $4.5 million for the EIS for the Ohio Hub? Something that will create a minimum of 14,000 jobs statewide, raise downtown property values (and thus tax receipts), attract business and residents to downtown which would bolster the streetcar proposal, save energy, reduce carbon emissions, perhaps create an ready-made, easy to serve market for Ohio grown biodiesel, etc, etc. :x

Video: "The End of Suburbia" is now online at YouTube.com: http://www.energybulletin.net/21693.html 3-Minute Promo can be viewed at Google Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5459242714549184261

World oil production may have peaked-executive First few paragraphs: World oil production may have peaked-executive Scott Malone, Reuters BOSTON - World production of crude oil may have already peaked, setting the stage for declining output that could lag demand, a top advocate of the "peak oil" theory said on Thursday. Matthew Simmons, chairman of Simmons & Co. International, a Houston-based investment banking firm specializing in the energy sector, said U.S. government data showed that the world oil supply has declined through the first half of this year. Energy Information Administration data showed world supply of crude oil has declined to 83.98 million barrels per day in the second quarter after hitting 84.35 million bpd in the fourth quarter of 2005. "If you basically have another six to ten months of that decline lasting, then I think for certain we would look back and say, 'Guess what? We actually reached a sustainable peak in crude oil production in December 2005,'" Simmons said at a meeting of the United States of the the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas. (26 Oct 2006)

I did read it KJP on Energy Bulletin.net. I've read similar views on the empire stuff by quite a few others. Unfortunately, it's a sound and likely accurate argument.

I originally posted this (within the context of a C-A-C discussion in the Lorain-CLE commuter rail thread), but discussion of this is more appropriate here: I realize that it's challenge enough to just get the Ohio Hub as now proposed built, but I think at some point ORDC sould consider starting some of the Ohio Hub trains in Canton utilizing the proposed C-A-C route. Extensions like this to intercity rail corridors is not something that hasn't been done elsewhere. Some of the Detroit-Chicago Amtrak trains begin and end in Pontiac, some of the San Diegans between LA and San Diego go as far north of LA as San Luis Obispo, so there is successful precedent. It would be nice to start and end a couple of the CLE-DET and CLE-BUF trains in Canton, and some of the CLE-CHI ones under the Midwest Rail proposal too. I would have to think that this would add significant ridership to the system. Maybe they could do this as a "Phase II" of the Hub plan. It would be a lot harder for the NIMBY's in Silver Lake to fight the state, let alone on an interstate passenger rail service-- it would fall under the interstate commerce clause of the US constitution. Extend the Hub to Canton after the rest of it is built, then add C-A-C commuter trains.

US in a jam over what to do about traffic: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1018/p03s03-usgn.htm

My last comment on the CAC... Sorry Ken. I posted this before I read your comment above... Silver Lake is a municipality, not a neighborhood of Cuyahoga Falls, although it borders Cuyahoga Falls. The route that was picked for the CAC uses what is known as the "Akron Secondary" line between NS's Cleveland-Pittsburgh mainline and the CSX mainline through Akron. You can see it from Route 8 as you drive through Silver Lake. It's right next to the highway. The Akron-Canton portion would utilize the same line that the CVSR is using for their Canton runs. The line you are referring to is, I think, the Wheeling and Lake Erie line from Akron to Kent to Cleveland. That line was ruled out because it is too long and circuitous. Hudson isn't a problem. They waffled on supporting it initially, but eventually did, if I recall correctly. The ONLY community that opposes it is Silver Lake. I wish ORDC would consider starting some of the Ohio Hub trains in Canton utilizing the C-A-C route. It's not something that hasn't been done elsewhere. Some of the Detroit-Chicago Amtrak trains begin and end in Pontiac, some of the San Diegans between LA and San Diego go as far north of LA as San Luis Obispo, so there is successful precedent. It would be nice to start and end a couple of the CLE-DET and CLE-BUF trains in Canton, and eventually some of the CLE-CHI ones too. It would add significant ridership to the system, I would suspect. Maybe they could do this as a "Phase II" of the Hub plan. It would be a lot harder for the NIMBY's in Silver Lake to fight the state on interstate passenger rail service-- it would fall under the interstate commerce clause of the US constitution.

There are sections where speeds could be increased. I was just mentioning the problem areas because they would need to be addressed and made safe for park visitors. Also, just for clarification: the CVSR has weekday trips during summer and fall. There is at least one area where there is already a siding (north near the national park headquarters). There may be another area farther south where another siding could be installed that might be able to alleviate conflicts between the CVSR and the commuter trains. I'm getting a little out of my element now, though because I don't much about the nuts and bolts of infrastructure at this level.

There is already sprawl in the areas north and south of the park borders. What it would encourage is the densifying of development in those areas. With the Towpath and the CVSR, there is truly an intermodal system there. Another problem with using the CVSR line is that in some areas the line runs too close to the Towpath and other pedestrian traffic (Peninsula and Station Road are two areas that come to mind). There would have to be some fencing erected to keep people from wandering onto the tracks in the path of a commuter train. Right now, it's not an issue because the train doesn't have many trips and doesns't go any faster than 25 mph. But you can't have a successful commuter train at that low of a speed.

Excellent point. I've been wondering about this myself. That area IS totally car-dependent. Not very useful if you ask me.

Integrating Energy, Transportation, and Land Use: http://nyc.theoildrum.com/story/2006/10/1/164022/722

The right-of-way through Hudson has room to add at least one additional track, if not two. One additional track would be done anyway, I think, for the Ohio Hub. KJP can correct me here if I'm wrong. One of the biggest hurdles to the CAC through Hudson are all the NIMBY's in Silver Lake. They swarmed into the public meetings full of emotion and anger but no facts. I heard of pro-CAC people in Silver Lake who were threatened by their anti-rail neighbors. In addition, the mayor had a seat on the transportation committee who nixed the project from consideration. Again, KJP can probably fill in the details here. The NIMBY's had no problem with supporting a widening of I-77 which would negatively impact the communities in Cleveland that have already been divided by the freeway. In other words, they don't care about negative impacts for anyone else as long as they didn't have more train whistles in their community.

And if the damn thing didn't serve Ohio at crappy times, the ridership would be even higher. The only way to properly solve this problem, however, isn't to change the schedule but to invest in the infrastructure to increase capacity to raise average speeds and decrease the travel times. I figured out once that if the average speed of the LSL could be raised from the current 40 mph to just 60-65 mph, something like 4 or 5 hours would get shaved off the schedule. Just think of what the ridership would be then. Take it a step further--think of what TGV-style could do... Train travel in much of the US is torture. There are less developed countries with better train service than in what is supposed to be the richest country in the world. We're so dumb in this country when it comes to transportation it's pathetic.

Don't we also have to remember that the steps taken to create quiet zones also increase grade crossing safety which is probably even more important?

KJP: Regarding transit in national parks--- there was a plan in the 1990's to build light rail on the Grand Canyon's South Rim (where 90% of the visitor's go), and ban all auto traffic exept for those who would have stayed inside the park at the lodge, cabins, and campgrounds. Long story short, the plan was killed within a couple of years after the 1994 GOP congressional win. Zion National Park has banned all auto traffic (again, except for those staying in the park) and now have buses running every 10 minutes to all of the trail heads and sight seeing stops in the park (during the busy season). It has been a success. The last time I was there was in 1992. I arrived early, took a short hike, and by the time I was done the parking lot where I had parked was overflowing and the traffic was nuts. I left the park because I didn't want to be part of the problem. I would have loved to have parked my car outside the park and hop on a bus. Edward Abbey argued in his 1968 book Desert Solitaire that automobile traffic in the national parks should be banned. Obviously, nobody has ever listened.

GM sold their locomotive division (EMD--ElectroMotive Division) last year. I can't recall who bought it, though. How could they when the streetcar companies had to maintain their own infrastructure, maintain their rolling stock, and make a profit, yet driving was being made artificially cheap (as it still is today) by the public purse pouring money into streets and highways.

I agree, but I suppose the city needs to get all of its ducks in a row to avoid, or at least minimize, criticism.

Excellent article. It's great to see someone finally go after the likes of Wendell Cox and others. Interesting that these guys have a problem with land use planning being in the hands of the public sector, but they never seem to complain about government agencies being involved in highway planning.

You're right KJP, that guy should sink an abiotic well and retire. I've read some claims that some old oil reservoirs have magically filled back up with abiotic oil. Gee, somehow, this has escaped the big oil companies as I don't see any of them sinking new wells in these supposed old fields. It would be a heck of a lot cheaper than deepwater exploration... Seriously, the abiotic theory of oil has been refuted in profesisonal and academic geology circles (there was an article on this very subject in Geotimes a few months back). As someone with geology degrees, I can say that it made perfect sense. The idea that abiotic oil coming to save us from the inevitable peak and decline is a pipe dream, or more bluntly put: a hallucination.

Excellent. I'm glad Seattle is thinking in these terms. That's the one problem with most urban areas-- not enough greenspace, the din of traffic noise in the background too pervasive, etc. The comments about using greenspace for flood control, storm water, etc are really cutting edge thinking-- a whole-systems thinking that we need in urban planning. Using greenspace to control stormwater would be a lot cheaper than building and maintaining storm sewers. The Village Homes subdivision in Davis California has proven this, and the city of Napa, CA is proving this with the restoration of floodplains in the Napa River in the city rather than the building and maintenance of levies, New York City's investments in watershed restoration in the Catskills saved a billion dollars over what it would have cost for to construct a gargantuan new drinking water plant in the city. (I read a neat book on this kind of stuff called The New Economy of Nature) I seem to recall that this kind of thinking is beginning to crop up in the Columbus area. I know for sure it's cropping up in Cleveland with the City's Director of Sustainability Programs and at the county level in the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission. One unfortunate thing though, the Regional Sewer District is in the middle of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on deep underground storm water retention tunnels. Greenspace, wetland restoration, and other things could have handled a lot of Cleveland's storm water issues for less money.

Cleveland/Pittsburgh had an Anderson bus running between the airports for a while. It didn't work. Of course, the fair was outrageous-- $129 if I recall correctly. I only looked at their schedule/price list once, though.

DaninDC... that's exactly why I qualified my statement to reflect incomes/real estate in the Cleveland area. I have a decent income for this area, but would have a difficult time making ends meet in DC. I'm guessing the best I could do would probably be to live in Harper's Ferry and take MARC in every day. Don't know for sure as I don't know the area other than housing in most instances is out of site, just guessing. Brewmaster: Yes, land values are higher in the city, that's why we need creative solutions to lower the prices in SOME instances to prevent moderate and lower income people from being priced out of those neighborhoods. I recall reading a couple of years ago that in, I think what is becoming Cleveland's EcoVillage, a neighborhood land trust actually owns some of the housing lots. So, people only have to pay for the house and not the house + the lot. I'm not sure of the specifics of how the agreements are set up between the homeowner and the land trust, but those houses are always targeted for certain income levels when they go on the market. Not just anybody can buy them. It seems like a reasonable solution.

Let's hope not. You may shorten your commute, but you'll still have to drive for just about everything you need. You pretty much have to be married to your automobile to live in the exurbs. I live where I do because the community is walkable for many of my most common needs (not all, but enough). Unfortunately, I work in an exurb. The job is too good to give up right now, but it consumes probably 95% of my driving miles. My choice was to live close to my job and have a short commute but have to also drive for everything else, or live in a place like I do now that's walkable but have a 30-35 minute commute (one-way). I chose the latter. We have sort of a dual problem developing now though. Driving is getting more and more expensive. We want to see more efficient development patterns and re-birth of the urban core, but the new urban housing going in isn't in the affordability range for a lot of people. $250k+ for a condo (I'm speaking about the Cleveland area, this would be dirt cheap in some areas of the country) is too expensive, at least it is for me and my income, despite my commute and associated driving expenses. Besides, I don't like condos. I don't have, need or want a big house or a big yard, but I just don't like condos. Once you start getting into townhomes or detached homes in revived or reviving new-urbanist area, you're talking even more unaffordable amounts of money.