Eigth and State

Shocking

{quote]Why would you take Smitherman's word for anything?{/quote] Because I don't know where to find Duke's application to PUCO. I was hoping someone could confirm or disprove it. The point is that Duke's application supposedly applies to all future mass transit and not just the current streetcar project, so they definitely have it mind to set a precedent.

Has anyone seen the text of Duke's application to PUCO to recover the cost of the the proposed Duke utility relocations by charging higher rates to Cincinnati? According to Smitherman, the application says "All future mass-transit systems, including streetcars." I'll have to take Smitherman's word for it unless I see otherwise. I don't like the phrase "removing the cost of utility moves from future LRT planning." If a court does, in fact, side with the city, the cost is not removed, but shifted to someone else, whether it be city ratepayers, the City of Cincinnati municipality, all Duke ratepayers, Duke shareholders, or what have you. I don't think the Duke issue is going to go away.

I hope that if the caps are built, that drivers on FWW will have at least some view of the buildings. One of my favorite childhood memories was riding in a car with a view of the Central Trust tower. The Cincinnati skyline is perhaps the most rrecognized branding of the city of Cincinnati, and the view from south of the Central Trust tower, either from FWW or across the river in Covington, is the most popular angle. That said, I am confident that some skillful designer can find a way to meet the objectives of capping the highway while still preserving at least a portion of the view. I am even thinking of a building that fronts on the street on four sides but has an open center, or maybe capping two blocks and leaving two blocks open. Lighting of the highway is a concern also, as is fire protection. Trucks carrying certain hazardous materials are banned from using the I-71 tunnel at Lytle Park due to the risk of a catastrophic fire.

I drove by the Blue Ash airport the other day and for the first time in as long as I can remember, there were no aircraft. Seems kind of eerie.

^He got cited for operating a motorcycle without a license.

^- A kid on my street got pulled over for riding a bicycle with a motor assist. His dad went to court and ended up paying a fine of $200 or something like that.

I know a guy that lived in Washington Court House. He said that you have to be careful what you say about people, because everybody knows everybody. I guess that's typical of small towns, though. He didn't have anything bad to say about Washington Court House. If you enjoy being surrounded by lots of farmland, you will like Washington Court House.

If a judge rules in favor of the city, that is.

Maybe not a promise, but an expectation. Early campaigns were for two new stadiums and a jail. The actual ballot language for the first election was for a blank check, and didn't even specify stadiums. Nevertheless, the lack of a jail keeps coming up, as evidenced by the comments in today's council meeting.

I just now talked to a woman who is adamently against the streetcar, and is fired up from the media coverage. I asked her if she's been to Over-the-Rhine lately. "No, I don't go to Over-the-Rhine. I don't even go downtown. The only time I've ever been downtown was for two Reds games."

^Voters were promised a jail during the stadium campaign. While that project was sponsored by Hamilton County, there was so much involvement with the City of Cincinnati that I can see why folks are confused. I think the stadium campaign really hurt the Metro Moves / Streetcar / transit in general cause, because people just don't trust the "government."

1.<br><br> 2.<br><br> 3.<br><br> 4.<br><br> 5.<br><br> 6.<br><br> 7.<br><br> 8.<br><br> 9.<br><br> 10.<br><br> 11.<br><br> 12.<br><br> 13.<br><br> 14.<br><br>

Did you get the Torker yet?

^Add to that the cost of private streets, driveways, parking lots, etc. I bet the private portion of the system meets or exceeds the cost of the public portion.

Greater Cincinnati Water Works is a department of the City of Cincinnati and they are making an effort to work with the City Manager, as is MSD. I don't know enough about Cincinnati Bell or Level 3 to come to a conclusion, although I know that 3 years ago, Level 3 was totally suprised by the streetcar project, just because it is so unusual for this area. Some people are just easier to work with than others. I think there is a grudge match going on between Duke and the City, partly because of the streetcar, and partly for other reasons.

I have provided the reference from the Ohio Revised Code already on this thread. A portion of the interstates are under the jurisdiction of ODOT, but the state owns ALL public right of ways, and for that matter, owns navigatable waterways too. Actually, they "hold them in trust for the benefit of the citizens." Municpalities have certain rights, as do adjoining property owners, utilities, and citizens, about the use of public rights-of-way. As the governing jurisdiction, the City of Cincinnati municipality has influence, but it does not have absolute control. It is my opinion, based on my own experience with other situations and based on the Ohio Revised Code and other sources, that the City of Cincinnati cannot force Duke out of Cincinnati streets. Others on this board will disagree with me. I concede that maybe I am wrong, but even if I am, I think it is still an important issue that is a serious concern for the streetcar project, because I don't think that Duke is going to back down. At the minimum, the Duke issue is causing delay. I have made my case. We will have to agree to disagree. :-)

It's a combination of many things, but certainly wages of construction workers play a part. In Hamilton County, Ohio, the average salary for all workers is around $35,000 per year. In Thailand, for example, the average salary is equivalent to about $2000 per year. That is a HUGE difference, and the reason why it is more cost effective to manufacture things in Thailand and ship them to the United States, even including the cost of shipping, instead of manufacturing them in Ohio.

Cincinnati streets are owned by the State of Ohio. The City of Cincinnati has jurisdiction, but not "ownership." The policy of the State of Ohio is that all utilities have equal access to the public right-of-way, with rules set by the local jurisdiction. Cincinnati does not own the street in the same way that a property owner owns his own property fee simple. If the City of Cincinnati, for example, wanted to vacate a street and sell it to a developer, the city cannot simply tell the utilities to "get off my property." The utilities have a right to be there. Honestly, I don't know how it's going to turn out, or what the courts will do. I'm not a lawyer, much less one that specializes in public right-of-way and utilities. Something I am certain of, though, is that this issue is anything but simple, and that an attitude such as "we own our streets" does not sit well with Duke.

^Thanks for posting that, but I'd like to say another time, just by way of explanation, that in Ohio, Streetcars are considered utilities, and have the same legal status as other utilities. This is the position that Duke apparently is taking. Now here's the rub: the proposed Cincinnati Streetcar is being sponsored by a municipality, not a "private" utility such as, say, the Cincinnati Street Railway Company, which operated the first streetcar in Cincinnati, in 1859. So, does the law recognize the City of Cincinnati's right to force Duke to move the Duke Utilities for the streetcar, or does the law protect Duke's right to occupy the right-of-way free from the demands of other utilities? I tend to side with Duke, not because I am opposed to the streetcar, but because I think that the courts will side with Duke. I realize that some folks on this board disagree with me. Most people who I know that work in the utility industry side with Duke. In any case, there is no recent legal precedent, because no streetcars have been operated in Cincinnati since 1951, and the last time a new streetcar line was built must have been some time before that. Does anyone know if there was any conflict for the waterfront line in Cleveland? Then again, that line may not be a "streetcar." They didn't have this issue in Portland because the state law in Oregon is different. I don't think Duke is going to back down, and if the courts do, in fact, side with Cincinnati, Duke is going to try to recover their costs through higher rates, and Duke has already taken steps toward that goal. I think that Duke has a better team of lawyers at their disposal than Cincinnati does, and more experience. They are better at playing the legal game. Cincinnati has the advantage of being a "public authority," where the courts tend to side with the public. This project has ALREADY been delayed by the Duke issue. The City of Cincinnati could have avoided this whole issue by just coming up with the money that Duke asked for. They have apparently chosen to risk delay of the schedule to save money.

^ My current bike is a mountain bike with smooth tires, fenders, a luggage rack with panniers, and lights. I use it mostly for local trips. I like it and it has held up well, but it is not comfortable for trips over 25 miles, and it is fairly heavy. I had a road bike on my wish list, but I don't want anything too expensive or too fragile, and I want the ability to add a luggage rack. That Torker has me interested. I should check that out! Thanks for posting!

^ I just bought a new bike headlight. In fact, I bought two of them, at $40 each. The new LED lights are much, much better than the old ones. I used to have a 15W incandencent bulb light that had a rechargeable lead-acid battery that weighed over a pound. The battery finally quit working, so I bought two new lights. They take the little AA size batteries. At night, following cars usually turn their bright lights on when they see my tail light. This is reassuring, because I'm fairly certain that they saw me. A white helmet and white clothes help as well.

Yahoo news today is reporting that American salaries have dropped to the level of 1989. I think it's pretty simple: people can no longer afford to drive like they used to. Sure, young people are spending their money on cell phones instead of cars, but the point is that they simply have less to spend and can't afford both.

You make it sound so simple.

Such as future streetcar expansions?