Old AmrapinVA

In regards to the subject that only the rich will fly because oil prices have climbed and routes have been reduced, I cite the example of Japan on why this is likely just more blow hard media bs. Japan has the most extensive train network of any country on the planet, has prohibitively high fuel prices according to recent U.S. media standards and has healthy bevy of low cost competition in its' own arena. Yet, the largest domestic air carrier of Japan made a record $450 million for FY '07 (Apr. '07 - Mar. '08) without having only the rich fly. For example, flights between Tokyo Haneda airport to Osaka Itami airport -- a 1 hour one-way trip -- are flown on gas gussling 747's as all economy class seating to compete with the JR bullet trains and they are flown like the DCA-LGA-BOS shuttles. So I find it hard to believe that the days of flying for the general public are over even if prices are climbing in the U.S. to, quite honestly, sane levels. The problem with domestic carriers is service and efficiency not price. The media again is way off base on its understanding of this issue but it does make for "great headlines". :lol:

^^ There's been polar ice cap growth in the Antarctic since detailed records have been keep...roughly 3 decades. Edit: Ha, I didn't even see the bootnote when I typed that!

^^ A regional government and simple county taxation code would stop this lunacy. As long as Cuyahoga County is carved into lots and lots of tax municipalities we'll see never ending retail redundancy and more "lesser of many evils".

Give me a lamp! Yep. Yep. Yep.

Clvlndr does bring up a fair point, IMHO: Why are some people talking now about how these funds could be used for neighborhood investment? I mean this process didn't start last week, kinda late in the game for this type of debate.

I thought it might have been...yank it then.

Few get to airport by bus, train http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-08-03-airport-transit_N.htm Updated 8/4/2008 By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — The USA may have the world's largest airport network, but it lags far behind Europe and Asia in getting passengers to and from airports on public transit, a new report shows. At many of the USA's largest airports, more than 90% of passengers arrive or leave in taxis or private cars, according to a report by the Transportation Research Board, a government-funded research group. In Europe and Asia, some airports see two-thirds of passengers using trains, buses or shared vans. The heavy reliance of airport-bound travelers on cars concerns aviation experts who say it may hinder airport expansions because the cars add to emissions that the government factors in when deciding on a new runway or terminal. "Regulators are going to care more about vehicles driving to the airport," said Dick Marchi, policy chief at the Airports Council International. Trains and buses are usually much cheaper than taking a taxi or driving a car and parking in an airport lot, said Stephen Van Beek, president of the Eno Transportation Foundation, a Washington, D.C., research group. The report says some U.S. airports don't make public transit a priority. At Philadelphia International Airport, commuter trains stop near the terminal. But only 3% of airline passengers use them, largely because of infrequent service, the board says. Another 4% take buses and vans. Cleveland Hopkins International Airport also has trains that stop at the terminal. But use has fallen to 2% because air travelers think it's slow and costly, the report says. In Oslo, however, 39% of air travelers use trains that travel at 95 mph, making a 30-mile trip between the airport and downtown in 19 minutes. Another 25% of Oslo's passengers take a bus or van. In the USA, "most people think of a bus as a dirty, smelly thing for poor people to get around the inner city," Marchi said. The report says many U.S. airports are spread out, making them hard to serve with trains and buses. The airports also provide little information on their websites about mass-transit options, focusing instead on flight status, the report adds. On the Amsterdam Airport Schiphol website, travelers can compare the cost of taxis and trains to nearby towns.

I don't think that Cleveland Brown Stadium is large enough capacity-wise to hold a World Cup Championship. Early rounds yes, but not the Championship. Atlanta's MARTA system is more comprehensive than Cleveland's rail system...and that was barely good enough. This is not meant to be a knock, just pointing out the challenges before our cities if we want to compete on a global level for these types of events. Do you honestly think Cleveland's rail system is good enough to compete against global cities? Atlanta is 2.5 times the size of Cleveland in terms of population and is sprawled out to no end, so I could understand why they thought MARTA was lacking. For Cleveland, the needed links, i.e. airport-to-downtown are there. That's a huge link that you're discounting, there are larger US metro's that don't have even that basic service and now struggling to come up with funds to provide it. Rando, does Cleveland, or Cincinnati for that matter, need a Tokyo type system. I'm all for expanded rail use, but I don't see the Olympic Committee giving a care if Cleveland had a subway line to West Salem that had transfer stop in Lodi and Hinckley Twp. Cleveland would need more capacity and newer rail cars and possibly extentions out to hotel/retail areas like Beachwood, and certainly the stations would need to be expanded, but the route system is pretty good. Again, the airport is another matter.

How is Cleveland's rail system not suffising? You have an airport-downtown link...a port, regular rail-downtown link...and another link connecting a cluster of moderate to high-end hotels to downtown in the University Circle area. Cleveland's capacity would have to be expanded dramatically, but in terms of rail "lines" Cleveland's are pretty damn good, there's no real stretching at all. Obviously we don't know the area in Cleveland that would be the Olympic Village and depending on that location existing rail lines would need to be spurred to those areas. Cleveland's airport is another matter entirely. It would need a serious upgrade to handle the steady stream of large widebodies. You can't ask the world to connect through Newark.

^^ Parma has Russians, Ukrainians, Italians, Polocks, Lithuanians, hell, even a small minority of Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. Euclid has Croats, Serbs, (actually every former Yugoslavian enclave has representation in Euclid), Ukrainians, Polocks (the Polka HoF!), Italians. I'm being very general here....there are lots of other European groups I'm sure I've under represented for both places. I love the architecture of the orthodox churches in both cities.

If you're from Wickliffe/Willowick....I really wouldn't be throwing stones at Euclid/Parma. If anything at least Euclid and Parma have ethnicity. ;)

Philly and Detroit don't have non-stops to China. Even "through" non-stops. Again...China traffic is different, at least currently, than England, France or even Japan. I believe Federal Inspections/Customs will be handled in Cleveland instead of Newark too. Whereas..BUF-IAD-PEK...would be done in Dulles then you fly Buffalo.

Oh there will definitely be plane changes in Newark. This is being operated by a 777-200ER, a widebody only seen rarely when Cleveland is used as a diversion point. It will likely be a 737-800 on the CLE-EWR leg. Flights to China are extremely regulated so even getting a "through" flight puts Cleveland at an advantage to regional markets like Detroit, Minneapolis, Philly, Pittsburgh and Cincy that have only regular connection service. At least, now, you have seamless check-in and bag check. Business travelers really do appreciate the small things that make life easier. "Through" Cleveland TATL flights are nearly worthless because of the amount of flights available from the East Coast and the Midwest. It's a small gesture, but it also shows CAL is still committed to Cleveland. It would have taken no effort or FAA convincing to remove the Cleveland leg. As for real non-stops to Asia, Cleveland needs more concrete.

Yeah, but most people here either have a life, don't give a rat's tail about geometry or never lived in Euclid and never asked who it was named after. That's why. Good points.

Euclidean Geometry, why would most people not get that? Most people on this board are pretty intelligent. Cleveland.com is a different story.

That's a fair point, MayDay. I certainly didn't see it from that point of view.

My grandfather worked at Lincoln Electric for 30+ years...so I know the area south of I-90 pretty well too. The rail line south of and parallel of I-90 was the true industrial & residental dividing line before the interstate was built. And again, I never said that Euclid was Paris, but I agree to disagree with your opinion on this being a fair/complete picture. You even kinda admitted it yourself. Plus jam...you aren't running on about how Parma is like Eastlake and Euclid is like Brunswick, which is pretty silly to begin with. I have no beef with opposing opinions, just not ones that are mocking and incorrect.

Not all airports in Ohio are doing poorly, even in this environment. Akron-Canton Airport Welcomes 7.7 Percent More Passengers in June GREEN, Ohio, July 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Things were hopping at Akron-Canton Airport (CAK) in June. Just 27 passengers short of an all-time record June (set in 2005), the airport enjoyed a substantial increase in travel during the month. More than 134,000 travelers used CAK in June 2008; a 7.7 percent increase compared to the same month last year. Plus, the passenger figure represents our fifth best month in airport history. Full story at http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080714/pl_usnw/akron_canton_airport_welcomes77_percent_more_passengers_in_june About Akron-Canton Airport Akron-Canton Airport kicked off CAK 2018, its 10-year, $110-million Capital Improvement in March of this year. The plan is the most ambitious in the airports 62-year history and includes a 600 ft. runway extension allowing full-sized jets to reach the west coast, Caribbean and Mexico. Other projects include a Customs and Border Patrol Facility, extended upper level concourse and the construction of Port Green, an industrial park that could bring more than 1,000 high paying jobs to northeast Ohio. Photos of the airport are available at www.flickr.com/akroncantonairport ; and Facebook members are warmly invited to join the Akron-Canton Airport group at www.Facebook.com by searching for Akron-Canton Airport. Additional information including flight reservations, driving instructions, and relaxation station is available at www.akroncantonairport.com, CAKs comprehensive web portal. SOURCE: Akron - Canton Regional Airport

I can stand the ignorance of people that grew up in other cities on the subject of the Cleveland suburbs. I can't stand for fellow Cleveland area folks who probably grew up on the Shaker Blvd. plateau mocking other Cleveland area places though. I mean, the working class folks had to live somewhere when people were stupidly fleeing the city, not all of them could afford houses near Cedar & Lee. Again, part of the reason the Cleveland area is a mess is because of these ignorant attitudes. First off, just like Ink's thread on Lakewood...he shows none of the apartment buildings along the lakeshore. With Euclid in particular, he dosen't show the older A-frame housing closer to E. 185th and up towards Lake Shore Blvd. I think both threads show an incomplete aspect of both places. Not saying Euclid is Paris, but it's not as bleak as this thread.

^^ I'm going to play devil's advocate to one part of Litt's article. Wouldn't the functions of the skywalks promote conventions in Cleveland in the winter...kinda like Minneapolis' many, many skywalks in their downtown protect people from the cold winds there. I know Cleveland dosen't get nearly as cold as Minneapolis in the winter, but it is certainly sees a lot of snow compared to most other American cities and it can be difficult to walk even a few blocks when the lake effect is in full gear. I'm not promoting the skywalks idea (I think it's a street life killer as well), I'm just thinking FC and the county or whoever supports this blueprint will probably use the argument to promote that part of the plan.

There have been a few articles in the past 6 months that have alluded to the fact that the city is in no rush to tear the IX Center down to make room for the airport any longer. In fact, if I remember correctly, one article stated that they want to sell it back to the former owner (who currently leases it). I've tried a few times in the last few days to search for these articles. I believe one was in Crain's and the other in the PD. Neither website has a good search function, so I haven't turned up anything. But I think it's an important point to make in this discussion because there have multiple comments here that just assume that eliminating the IX Center is still the plan after a new CC is built. I'm not saying it shouldn't be, just that there have been other indications lately. The demolition of the I-X Center was tied to the FAA/Port's plan to expand to the airport. Only a part of that plan has been implimented over the past few years: the third NW/SE runway was built along with an extention to 10000ft. of one of those parallels. The I-X center was going to be demolished, I believe, to build a N/S runway and a second terminal or cargo facility further down the Berea Freeway. All those plans have been are off UFN. If the I-X Center gets demoed...it wont be for airport expansion now.

Older cities' downtowns (such as Cincinnati or Cleveland) can often times boom without a lot of new construction. Many older structures which had fallen out of use may be rehabbed and reclaimed. Just because you don't see cranes doesn't always mean there isn't growth. DC has an "old" downtown yet lots of large scale construction. IF DC isn't your taste of old, I'd offer up Boston. I'm not picking on Cleveland or Cincy at all and I'm not saying either city isn't seeing downtown growth, I'm just saying that the definition of "booming" in one region might be different than in another.

Ugh...all Ohio cities are "dying" except in some regards Columbus. Long term population growth, economic growth, etc. are all weaker in Ohio cities/regions than in a nation as a whole. Columbus, at times, meets the national averages. You'd think in Cincinnati, with all the economic diversity that it has, people would question why growth is so anemic in that region instead of proclaiming its downtown as "booming". (BTW, I see the Cincy picture threads and unless 75 cranes are hiding behind Carew, I don't think it's quite on the level of "booming" yet by national standards.) Lets not go off the deep end here. Cincy could have made the #10 if it hadn't challenged the Census so I can see why people in Cleveland are frustrated by the lack of action or response on this issue by their government.

Fuel surcharges are not designed to cover all costs regarding fuel. They're set up to offset rising fuel prices. I prefer fuel surcharges that are added to the price of a ticket rather than creating new baggage fees for the simple fact that fuel surcharges are more likely to be removed if fuel prices decline. Creating a new set of fees that are unrelated to energy prices are likely to be around for a long time.

^^ Aye. Aye. That's why the list thing bothers me as "proof" of one thing over another. Unless you have something straightforward or simple (and art is neither)...it's easy to play around and get the results that please the creator then claim the formula is objective. :)