BuckeyeB

Despite the fact that Florida has a corporatist/Tea Party governor, things keep progressing. By 2018, the state could have the makings of a public transportation system that is a real and viable alternative to highways. Orlando's Sunrail will be extended to Orlando International Airport, connecting with All Aboard Florida and at the south end, it will be possible to connect with TriRail. It will be much easier to get around in that part of the state and that will lead to a call for more.

Something else to consider: That to build the Penn Station annex, you have to demolish the block of buildings on the south side of Madison Square Garden. Expensive, but if you do this, you can build a new terminal above the tracks and let MSG take its course. When MSG goes, then you can build a new concourse with a sunlit atrium with higher ceilings.

It was in the Business Courier in 2013. THANKS!!!!

Looking for an editorial cartoon called Old Cincinnati (I think) and had some old curmudgeon who kept saying no every time anyone had an idea, probably five or six times before saying "what part of no don't you understand?"

The feds will probably ask the states to give back part of the capital improvement funding if they want to proceed with their budget cutbacks. Then the state "leaders" can say -- those bad people in Washington DC are forcing us to spend money we don't want to spend. So for the next step in my phony-baloney political career, elect me to replace them and I'll make everything better! Politicians. Shallower than puddles and lower than worm bellies. It's also the weakness of relying on a state driven approach. Even the "safe" states will have problems.

I think the feds might have something to say about this, since a lot of the money spent was federal money with certain expectations.

It's also yet another "gimme" for highway contractors.

I guess I was wrong about fatalities. It was a long time ago I read an account of this (not sure of the source). Below is a picture from apparently another crossing over the Grand River. It looks like a still-standing trestle (in the background) crossing eastward (I think). I don't know how extensive the network was in Painesville-- the reverse view- Flickr Interesting to note that the New York Central looks to have replaced the stone arch bridge with a new concrete structure!

INDOT Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/indianadepartmentoftransportation Governor Mike Pence: https://www.facebook.com/GovernorMikePence

Need a list of the Ohio delegation and how they voted. At least some of these have Facebook pages. Thanks those who voted no and give the others hell.

Kill Amtrak amendment introduced. Call or email your Congressman: http://www.narprail.org/hotline--blog/late-filed-amendment-cuts-all-amtrak-funding-call-now

Going back to the maps, USDOT's Option Five is fascinating. Ohio would have had: Corridors: Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati 1-2X/day Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago 1-2X/day Detroit-Toledo-Dayton-Cincinnati 1-2X/day Cincinnati-Indianapolis-Chicago 1-2X/day Long distance routes 1X/day New York-Philadelphia-Pittsburgh-Canton-Ft Wayne-Chicago New York-Philadelphia-Pittsburgh-Columbus-Dayton-Indianapolis-St Louis Washington DC-Pittsburgh-Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago Washington DC-Charleston-Cincinnati-St Louis Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati-Atlanta-Jacksonville-Tampa/Miami Some of this is a bit of guesswork but it's a good representation. The connectivity would have been phenomenal and most Ohio cities would have had around 14 daily arrivals and departures. For example, if the Chicago-Miami/Tampa train was routed via Cincinnati it could have had connections to/from every major city in Ohio, plus Detroit. That's quite a catchment area. If one throws in the original New York-Buffalo-Cleveland-Chicago Lake Shore Limited (started shortly after Amtrak started operating when Cleveland was left off the national map) we have a pretty good network. If that train ran overnight between New York and Cleveland, it could have connected at the latter city with a morning train to Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati. Likewise, the Washington DC-Charleston-Cincinnati-St Louis train could have had thru cars to Chicago by connection with a Cincy-Indy-Chicago train. Just goes to show what might have been possible. In regard to the corridors shown above, I have one or two daily trains. Most "corridors" started off with two, but I was being conservative. Also, New York-Albany-Buffalo and New York-Philadelphia-Pittsburgh were designated as corridors, leaving only the Buffalo-Cleveland and Pittsburgh-Cleveland lines as gaps in a cohesive network of corridors stretching from the east coast to more corridors radiating from Chicago. Filling those would have been easy if New York had extended one of its trains to Cleveland from Buffalo and the commuter trains operating between Cleveland-Youngstown and College PA (Beaver Falls)-Pittsbugh had been used as a nucleus for a Cleveland-Pittsburgh operation. A few years later, Ohio could have taken over the Cleveland-Youngstown service with 100% federal funding for the first year, but it declined to do so, another colossal mistake. At the time, the railroads were in a pretty run down state, but all of the major rail terminals were intact, even if money would have had to have been found to upgrade them and main line tracks. In addition, things were much more favorable for state to add service. Section 403b shared operating costs on an 80/20 fed/state basis, unlike today, where states have to cover of the all the costs. I seem to remember that the 3C Corridor would have only cost the state $2.3 million to start up in the early 1970's as well. If only that was possible today! Gives us something to aspire to.

My jaw dropped when I saw this as I did not know Ohio had THREE corridors in the running until nearly the end. This stuff is a must-read and KJP is right: Ohio's lack of service is its own fault, not Amtrak.

Keep in mind that he is probably also talking about bases as well as ships, where solar and other means of power generation might be used.

Offered without comment: Developing alternative energy sources is a matter of national security, Ray Mabus, Secretary of the US Navy, said Monday at a conference on climate change. "Energy can be - and is - used everyday as a weapon," Mabus told the Climate Leadership Conference held outside the nation's capital. Speaking to a room full of business leaders, scientists and representatives from non-profits and government agencies, Mabus said that unless the US has a homegrown source of fuel, the country will remain "hostage to global price increases." The Navy must have the "ability to be at the right place all the time," he said, which depends on the Navy's "ability to have fuel." This is why, by no later than 2020, at least half of the Navy's power will come from non-fossil fuel sources, he said. "It's an issue of national security," Mabus said. "It makes us better at defending this country." http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2015/02/24/energy-can-be-a-weapon-fossil-fuels-pose-a-security-risk-us-navy