Eigth and State

^--"Some cities (or at least smaller towns anyway) get it right..." That's a good argument for smaller units of local government instead of one big metro government, but that's a subject for another thread. In the case of the streetcar, the utility companies are all confused. Is it really going to happen, or not? Duke doesn't want to actually do the work until they are certain that the streetcar is actually going to get built. At the same time, the streetcar folks are waiting to hear from Duke when the utility work will be done. This is the problem with all the uncertainty - it leads to more uncertainty. It's usually a safe bet that the project will actually get built if it gets funded, so that's the threshold that utilities usually use. Again, it all comes back to funding.

The tunnel may last centuries, but not the oil supply.

"Dedicated for light rail" is not the same as "Dedicated for public use." Just sayin'. And don't forget about the other conditions, that for it to be banned it has to be a "streetcar," and funded by the city. But I agree that this proposed amendment is just dumb. It reminds me of the proposed federal balanced budget amendment. So you want the budget to be balanced? Then balance it, for crying out loud! We don't need a constitutional amendment to get it done. We just need the political will to do it.

I agree that not everything has to be spelled out. But construction of highways is one of the things that is explicitly spelled out in the state constitution as being a function of the state. Providing rides is not (at least not that I'm aware of).

I disagree with this. The word "public" in "public right-of-way" refers to use as well as ownership. To tell whether a place is a public right-of-way or not, it is necessary to find documentation for it in the public records. Lacking documentation, a court will make the decision. If it is public right-of-way, the documentation will say "This strip of land is hereby dedicated for public use" or something to that effect. The words "public" or "public use" should be in the documentation. If it doesn't say "public," then it's not a public right-of-way. Purchase of land by a public agency does not make it a "public right-of-way." It also has to be dedicated as such. Because it took me this long to find it. Here you go. First, a couple of examples. This is from the City of Cincinnati Municipal Code, Article 7 Section 8: "All instruments of dedications of lands for public use shall be submitted to the commission and approved thereon in writing by it before they may be offered for record..., No street, alley, way, or other public ground shall be accepted by the city as a public street, way, or ground, unless the plat and location thereof shall have been submitted and approved..." While not a definition, at least I found an example in context - from the Municipal Code, no less - that associates the words "public use" with "public street, way, or ground." Incidently, this ordinance establishes that a "public street, way, or ground" must be documented. Here are some more from the municipal code: "The public recreation commission...shall maintain the public landing for the specified purpose of encouraging the use of the city of Cincinnati as a port of call on the Ohio River." "The grant to occupy the streets, lanes, and public grounds of the city of Cincinnati for the purpose of erecting and maintaining poles..." "No grant shall be made to occupy the side of any street, lane, alley, or public place..." And here's one that shows that "public" is NOT the same as "publicly owned": "Whenever the commission shall have made a plan of the city or any portion thereof, no public building, street, boulevard, parkway, park, playground, canal, riverfront, harbor, dock, wharf, bridge, viaduct, tunnel and publicly or privately owned public utility, or part thereof, shall be constructed..." Evidently, the word "public" in "public utility" refers to something else other than ownership, as a public utility can be either publicly or privately owned. Finally, here's the definition: (drumroll, please......) Ohio Revised Code 4939.01 E Municipal Public Way Definitions :speech: (E) “Public way” means the surface of, and the space within, through, on, across, above, or below, any public street, public road, public highway, public freeway, public lane, public path, public alley, public court, public sidewalk, public boulevard, public parkway, public drive, and any other land dedicated or otherwise designated for a compatible public use, which, on or after the effective date of this section, is owned or controlled by a municipal corporation. “Public way” excludes a private easement. So a "public way" must be both dedicated for public use AND publicly owned. I was right about the use part, but wrong about the ownership part. My apologies. :oops: I still maintain that the OASIS line is NOT a public right-of-way, because it has not been dedicated for public use. The transit center and subway ARE public rights-of-way because they exist below a public street, contrary to what I said before. (Apologies.) Whether use of the subway or transit center qualifies a rail vehicle as a streetcar is another question that I'm not going to take on at this time. Vine street is unquestionably a public right-of-way. I-71 and I-75 have me puzzled for the moment. I do the work so you don't have to. This board wears me out sometimes. :-)

Sorry if I can't explain it better. The point of the rhetorical question is that I can't think of a single example in Ohio of a public railroad right-of-way. But I do think that those human-powered rail vehicles are cool. The OASIS line is not a public right-of-way. If it was, there should be a documentation for it, dedicating it for public use. If you think that the OASIS line is a public right-of-way, I challenge you to find documentation for it. Now that I think about it, "dedication" was the word I was looking for. From dictionary.com: (bold is mine) Dedicate: to mark the official completion or opening of (a public building, monument, highway, etc.), usually by formal ceremonies. And while I'm at it, Public: 1. of, pertaining to, or affecting a population or a community as a whole: public funds; a public nuisance. 2. done, made, acting, etc., for the community as a whole: public prosecution. 3. open to all persons: a public meeting. 4. of, pertaining to, or being in the service of a community or nation, especially as a government officer: a public official. 5. maintained at the public expense and under public control: a public library; a public road. Definition 3, I think, is the one that applies here. Others think that definition 5 applies, and I can understand why they would think that. All of this only matters if the ballot passes. As was said upthread, if the voters of Cincinnati want to build commuter rail on the OASIS line, they would be smart to defeat this ballot and thus avoid the question. But I still think that if the ballot passes and the definition of "public" went to a court decision, the court would unquestionably allow commuter rail on the OASIS line. Claiming that the OASIS line is a "public right-of-way," in my humble opinion, is just ridiculous. After all, the City of Cincinnati routinely pays compensation to SORTA for utility work that crosses the OASIS line.

KJP - I've been wanting one of those human-powered rail vehicles for years. I was thinking about that when I wrote that above post. Where is that railroad? The Whitewater Valley Railroad in Indiana has a day where owners of private railmobiles are allowed to take them on the railroad. Seems like fun. For reference, I read about one of the early railroads - it may have been the Baltimore and Ohio - that tried to operate a railroad as if it were a canal, with private owners hauling their own wagons on their own schedules over a railroad, and collecting tolls for that privelage. Of course it failed, because railroad technology does not allow two vehicles to pass in either the same or opposite direction on the same track; only central control will solve the traffic problem. You still didn't answer my question: where in Ohio can I put flanged wheels on my automobile or wagon and drive it on a public railroad?

^No, "public" refers to access, not ownership. Vine Street is a public right-of-way. It is open to everyone, all the time. All utilities can use it, subject to Ohio law. There is no discrimination of access. Technically, the City of Cincinnati doesn't own Vine Street - it is held in trust by the State of Ohio for the benefit of the citizens. The City of Cincinnati merely maintains it. By contrast, Eden Park, City Hall, the Ludlow firehouse, fountain square, and the Blue Ash Airport are city-owned lands but are not part of the public right-of-way. Access to the public is restricted. Utilities can't use them without permission from the City. To determine whether a place is a public right-of-way or not, it is necessary to find documentation for it. Hopefully, this can be found in the recorder's office. Any controversy is ulitimately settled by a court.

^So where in Ohio can I put flanged wheels on my automobile or wagon and drive it on a public railroad right-of-way? And how much is the toll? :-D

You joke about this, but I sometimes wonder if Ohio cities are hampered by our own laws, and the only way to make progress moving forward is to completely change our political process. The City of Cincinnati is it's own worst enemy sometimes. This is a whole 'nother topic, though.

^ Yes, it's true that a passenger rail vehicle of any kind will have to oocupy or at least cross a public street to get to the transit center, but that's not prohibited by the ballot language unless it meets ALL of the conditions that I outlined above. Prohibited under the ballot language are streetcars funded by the city and running on rails primarily on existing public rights-of-way.

No, the ballot language does not prohibit rail from entering downtown. There are many ways that it could happen. Here's the ballot language again. I added the bold. "Shall the Charter of the City of Cincinnati be amended to prohibit the City, the City Manager, the Mayor, the Council and the City's various boards, commissions, agencies and departments from spending or appropriating any monies or incurring any indebtedness or contractual obligations for the purpose of financing, designing, engineering, constructing, building or operating a streetcar system which means a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public rights of way through the year 2020, by enacting new Article XVI?" The ballot prohibits the City of Cincinnati and no one else from spending money on a streetcar. Hamilton County, SORTA, the State of Ohio, the Indiana and Ohio Railroad, the University of Cincinnati, or anyone else is not prohibited from spending money on a streetcar. You might be able to argue that SORTA is prohibited by extension if they recieve funding from the City of Cincinnati. The prohibition specifies streetcars only. Streetcars by definition run in the street. The subway and riverfront transit center are not streets. The word "primarily" leaves a lot of room for interpretation. It does not strictly prohibit any kind of rail from occupying any street. A light rail line from, say, Kings Island to downtown that occupies the downtown streets would not be "primarily" in the street. It would be "primarily" on private right-of-way parallel to I-71. The Eastern Corridor would be "primarily" on railroad right-of-way. A court of law would have the final say on the interpretation. "Existing" excludes new right-of-way, regardless of whether it is public or not. The once-proposed Mt. Auburn tunnel would be a new right-of-way. "Public" excludes private rights-of-way, such as railroads. The OASIS line, the former CL&N, the Wasson line, the Hyde Park Peavine line and all operating railroads are private rights-of-way. "Rails" (plural) excludes monorail. Not that anyone expected to build a monorail. For what it's worth,"Rails" also excludes trackless trolleys such as in Dayton, buses decorated to look like trolleys such as in Louisville, and bus-rapid-transit. For the record, I'm not for this amendment, but my interpretation of the ballot language shows that it was specifically targeted toward streetcars, not to any of the other rail projects. Probably the petitioners learned their lesson from the last attempt.

John, the uptown and downtown streetcars would clearly be prohibited if this amendment passes. That is the whole point. The Northern, Central, and Eastern Corridors would not be affected: I-75 and I-71 are not public rights-of-way. They are limited access rights-of-way. The former CL&N, Wasson Line, Oasis Line, etc. are not public rights-of-way. They are private rights-of-way. In addition, none of those proposed lines are street railways. Street railways by definition run in the street. Anything going on in Blue Ash or Covington will not be affected at all because it is outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Cincinnati. I only read the ballot language. I didn't read the actual amendment. Every public street is documented in the public records - or at least it should be. Some old ones are hard to find.

^No, no, no, no, no. Publicly owned land is NOT the same as "public right-of-way," which has a very strict definition. "Existing, public rights-of-way" in Cincinnati refers primarily to streets. It includes "paper streets," or uninproved streets, and it includes streets not accessible to automobiles, such as hillside steps. It includes the public landing, and may include Findley Market. "publically owned land" is entirely different. City Hall, Eden Park, firehouses, bicentennial park, the Blue Ash airport, and other publicly-owned lands that are not streets are not counted in the "right-of-way" definition. Railroads are harder to figure out, and different rules apply to different railroads, but I can't think of a single example in Cincinnati where an abandoned railroad right-of-way became a public right-of-way.

^Railroad rights-of-way are not public. The ballot language says public.

^"Existing, public right-of-way" does not include railroad right-of-way or city-owned land such as parks. It includes streets only. The language says "primarily on existing, public right-of-way," which of course would be interpreted in court, but would most likely allow the Eastern Corridor to use Pete Rose Way if the route was "primarily" not on existing, public right-of-way.

^ For once the mainstream media really was the best source of information. People inside the WTC didn't even have that viewpoint. One of the survivors was on his way down the stairs, not realizing what had happened and not in any particular hurry, when he got a call on a cell phone from a family member telling him to get out of there, because more planes were coming. Another survivor was in one of the smaller buildings of the complex and recalled that he saw debris falling outside but did not realize the seriousness of it, and thought that the firefighters would put out the fire and it would be all over.

^I am surprised that the language is so clear. Their definition of "streetcar" does not prohibit Amtrak, the proposed 3-C, the zoo train, the Delta train (if it were in Cincinnati,) the I&O dinner train, trackless trollies, buses designed to look like trollies, the proposed Eastern Corridor commuter line, or the once proposed Kingport light rail, aerial cable lines to Mt. Adams, inclines, or the Wiremobile but it does clearly prohibit the OTR loop that we have been calling the Cincinnati Streetcar.

Jake, you seem to be suspicious of everything that the government does! Here's the press release from the Indiana Department of Highways. There's a contact on there where you can ask for photos. http://www.in.gov/activecalendar/EventList.aspx?view=EventDetails&eventidn=37081&information_id=74313&type=&syndicate=syndicate According to the press release, the decision to close the bridge was made only a day after the crack was discovered, after consultation with engineers both within and without the department of highways.

It's not in Ohio but the State of Indiana just closed the I-64 bridge over the Ohio River near Louisville after an inspection discovered a crack in a fracture-critical member. I guess this shows that Interstate bridges are not invulnerable to failure.

I was home that day and walked outside to pick up the newspaper early that morning and noticed what a beautiful day it was. It was election day in Cincinnati, the first City Council election after the 2001 riots, so I turned on the radio to WLW to listen to the polical commentary. This was really coincidental, since I hardly ever listen to the radio at home. Right after a traffic report, they reported that a "small commuter" plane had crashed into the WTC. Then, they went to some commercials. Those would be the last commercials until about 8:00 at night. I stayed with my radio in my bedroom for the entire day. I could have travelled somewhere to watch TV, but didn't want to miss anything. The whole story has been pieced together as well as possible since then, but hearing it live it came in all jumbled. An eyewitness viewing the damage from the first plane through binoculars reacted to the explosion from the second plane, not realizing that it was another plane. They reported a fire at the Pentagon before they reported that a plane had crashed; an eyewitness said that he saw the plane, and identified the airline, which at that time was claiming that all it's planes were accounted for. By the end of the day, the news had identified the hijackers - it was pretty obvious - and listed one of their homes as Palm Beach, Florida. A caller noted that there was a pilot training center there. By late afternoon, it was well known that the plane that crashed into the WTC came from Boston, but when they interviewed Guliani, he was unaware of that fact when a reporter asked. People who were involved may have had the true firsthad information, but those who watched on TV or listened on the radio had the better coverage. There were people who survived the WTC and made it all the way to New Jersey before they even knew what caused it. Most of the internet was down that day, a significant event that didn't even get reported. About a month after 9-11, a poster board with a photo of Osama bin Laden side-by-side with Bert from Sesame Street appeared on a Reuters photo of a political demonstration and caused a minor sensation on the internet. The photographer hadn't noticed it; an alert reader discovered another photo of a similar poster. Some investigation revealed that someone had googled images of Osama Bin Laden and selected some on the first few pages; this included a photoshopped image from a satire site that collected images of Bert photoshopped with Hitler, Stalin, etc. Certainly the man that created the poster didn't know who Bert was. The two photos showed a lot of angry people with posters of Osama bin Laden and Bert. This was the first time I laughed after 9-11. Oh yeah, one more thing. My brother was on vacation in Cozumel and found out about it in the afternoon. As all planes were grounded, he was stranded. One might think that Cozumel might be as good a place as any to be stranded, but he spent the rest of his vacation trying to get home. Airport security in Mexico would not meet FAA standards for weeks at best; entire resort towns would probably go vacant, at least for the short term, without a steady supply of tourist. He ended up catching a cruise ship to Miami, and then flying home. Obviously, travel was in all disarry for a while. Guess what they told him on the cruise ship? "If you have the money, we would appreciate it if you would pay the normal fare. If you don't have the money, we would like to help you find your way home at no cost." They offered a free ride! The line was Carnival. I thought I would mention that since they were so nice to offer that. For the record, my brother had the money and paid the fare.

The NRA, Sierra Club, etc, have strong, organized lobbies that are supported by members. I can't think of any strong lobby that is supported by non-drivers. Unlike the federal government, state and local governments are charged with providing for citizens' health, safety, and general welfare. There are numerous provisions for roads in Ohio, but can you show me in the Ohio state constitution any place that requires state or local government to provide rides?

Hamilton County Commissioners have to approve the budget for every Capital Improvements Project that MSD spends money on.

I just noticed that a building has been torn down on Tennessee / Ross Avenue across from the Showcase Cinema site. Was that the one that was built over the subway, and was the subway disturbed?