Eigth and State

A friend of mine grew up near Chicago and specifically moved to Cincinnati for school and employment because he wanted to be close to... ...Red River Gorge in Kentucky! So I guess the point is that not everyone likes beaches, or mountains. Anyway, Ohio can't change her geography, or her weather, so why worry about it?

Consider that heavy trucks also have weight limits. Politically, increasing the weight limit for buses would also require increasing the weight limit for heavy trucks, even if the two weight limits are not the same now. In Detroit, there are very heavy ore trucks that have about 10 axles. In Austrailia, they run "trains" of very long tractor trailers. In the mining industry, very heavy trucks and other equipment are common. So, the technology is there. Underground utilities are designed for a certain loading. Very heavy vehicles could injure underground utilities. That's not to mention the pavement itself.

Oh dear.

Anything can happen before construction is complete, but the bid award is an important milestone date. The bid award basicly gives the contractor permission to start, and promises to pay him for his work. To my knowledge, there has been no bid award yet, for trackwork, vehicle purchase, maintenance facility, or anything else other than design. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. What has happened so far is design and a little bit of utility work. What normally happens if the contract is cancelled after the bid is awarded? I don't know, because I've never seen it happen, but I imagine that the contractor can sue the city for payment.

I used to ride the bus up Clifton Avenue and saw that stone structure and wondered what it was. One day I made it to the Ohio Book Store on Main Street after hearing that it has some neat Cincinnati books. I picked up Wagner and Wright's issue No. 4: inclines, and paged through it in the store. Right there in the book was a photo of that stone structure when it was still in service, supporting a truss bridge that held the incline tracks, and an incline vehicle that in turn carried a streetcar. I was hooked, and eventually acquired all ten of the Wagner and Wright books.

Using the 20% rule, it can be calculated that people who make less than about $4000 a year cannot afford any transportation at all, not even the bus. Somewhere around the $20,000 mark allows people to drive. Above that, drivers just spend more on more expensive cars or more miles. Super rich people have their own jets. A lot of forumers talk about making transit that attracts the "choice" riders, as opposed to the poor. The guy making $90,000 per year would be a 'choice" rider: he can definitely afford to drive. He could save about $20,000 per year by riding the bus instead of driving. Obviously, he chooses to drive instead of taking the bus. It must be really important to him to be able to drive, because he spends so much on it. No one is making a judgement on whether or not it is "okay" to drive.

The example above of the guy making $90,000 per year works out to be 24% of income spent on driving. I read another article that says that the typical percentage of income spent on transportation is about 20%, regardless of income.

^ On the same page the Enquirer published a piece by the City Manager who said that the streetcar and the propery tax are not related because they affect different budgets.

^Would this vehicle be appropriate for passenger rail such as the proposed 3-C line, or just commuter rail?

I think his hope is that cities like Cincinnati will make up most of the difference by cutting services without affecting the tax burden much.

Conversation I had with a co-worker: "If you have any problems, feel free to call me on my cell phone, or use my personal e-mail." "Why, are you leaving us?" "Yes, I'm moving to Washington State." "I had no idea. When are you leaving?" "Today." "Wow, that's a bit of a shock. Why are you moving?" "I really like the Pacific Northwest. I like Portland." "Are you from Cincinnati?" "Yes, born and raised here." "Do you have family here?" "Yes, my whole family is from here." "What about you wife?" "Her whole family is from here. She won't be leaving for another month, though." "What do you think about Portland's streetcars and light rail?" "They seem to work well. I've never ridden, though. They look nicer than Chicago's." "Well, they're newer than Chicago's." "Yea, I guess that's right. I hear that they are bankrupting the city of Portland, though."

The image is the same on the camera's LCD screen. The live view is fine, though a review of the literature seems to indicate that the live view and the photos are unrelated, and I don't know if they even use the same imager.

Help! What's wrong? Every photo I take, in any mode, comes out something like this. I am using a Nikon D5100 with an 18-55 VR lens. The camera and lens came togther as a kit. This started happening two days ago. Is it broken, or am I doing something wrong?

Yes, please.

This is a well-researched post.Thanks for taking the time. For about 30 years, the industry has been trying to get casino gambling in Ohio. It seems that the indiana casinos have finally influenced Ohio voters. What I find interesting is that a previous proposal that failed in Ohio was to allow riverboat gambling. Riverboat gambling passed in Indiana; however, after a few years, the requirement that the boat had to be moving on the water was eliminated, and now they operate dockside. The current Ohio law does not specify riverboats at all, and the casino is being built on land. This just shows how much our inftrastructure can be influenced by cultural effects, and it can take DECADES to get a law changed. The other interesting thing is that all of the excuses why we couldn't have baseball on Broadway Commons were overcome by the casino developer. Marge Schott said that baseball on Broadway Commons wouldn't work because people wouldn't be able to find the ballpark! She also said that the riverfront was historically the home for baseball. Did she not know about Crosely Field, the Deer Creek Commons, the Palace of the Fans, etc.?

Normally the old conduit would only be removed if there is a conflict. Often, the old one is filled with sand or some other material to prevent it from collapsing. It's cheaper to fill it than it is to remove it. The drawback is that after many years, there are lots of abandoned utilities in the street. This is part of the reason why downtown Cincinnati and Over-the-Rhine are so difficult to work in. Don't forget that the historic streetcar rails are usually still there, and they are really expensive to remove.

I don't know the details of this work but normally when a water main is replaced, the old one remains in service while the new one is built in a new alignment. When the new one is finished, the old one is abandoned. This way, service is maintained during construction. Presumably, the new main in this case will not conflict with the streetcar. Cincinnati Water Works tries to keep an eye on other work, especially resurfacing and road widening, and keep a step ahead with water main replacement, so that they don't have to tear up a street that's just been paved.

Very nice! Trivia: Abraham Lincoln's funeral train passed through Union City.

One of the things I like about buses compared to driving is that it allows me to complete a loop starting and ending at home taking more than one bus route. For example, I can ride downtown, walk 10 blocks, and get on a different bus to go home. By contrast, the typical car driver drives to a parking space, and then returns to that space to drive home. Most drivers don't walk very far from the parking space.

^Mainly due to tradition. Many public transit companies began as private companies that were acquired by a government. The private companies charged tolls, and the governments carried on the same tradition. Most public transportation companies are "subsidized" (why are highways "funded" and transit "subsidized?) by the government from some other source of funding. For example, in some jurisdictions the transit revenue from fares is supplemented by an income tax, or a grant from the federal or state government. The crazy thing is that the percentage of revenue that comes from fares is very low, often under 20%. Why not just cut service by 20% and make it free? It is conceivable that cities could initiate free public transportation, funded by property or income tax, and come out ahead on the deal, but I doubt that it is likely to happen in any city that also offers "free" motorways. What if motorways were tolled while public transporation was free? New York City leans this way, since revenue from the bridge and tunnel tolls is used to partially fund their mass transit. "If you want to make enemies, try to change something." - Woodrow Wilson

This of course assumes that there is potential for development. Construction of a streetcar does not guarantee development. Streetcars are more successful in cities that already have a lot of new development going on than in cities that do not.

Come to think of it, I bet young people are flying less also. Basicly, there's less petroleum available per person. Something's got to give.

^Because commuters would see the bridge "empty" most of the time and gripe about it. Why not toll it? Freight carriers should be happy to pay the toll instead of sitting in traffic.

I see an easy way that Julie Janson can cut down on the hours she spends sitting in traffic.

^Looks like they also spent some big bucks on details.