Improved Airspace Management

The upcoming Thanksgiving holiday season prompted the President last week to reduce projected travel delays by allowing civilian airliners to use military air routes. The military routes are along the Eastern Seaboard (from Florida to Maine) creating a “Thanksgiving express lane” according to White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. The President was prompted to take this unusual action in part because of the extremely high percentage of delays encountered at Kennedy and LaGuardia airports. The on-time arrivals at the country’s two most congested airports were less than 61 percent. The nature of the air traffic control system is such that a delay at a single large airport has a cascading effect throughout the rest of the country. The expected number of travelers for this Thanksgiving will be around 27 million despite increases in fuel and airfares.

The reaction by the President has been applauded by the airlines but really fails at creating a long-term solution to the problem. By adding civilian aircraft to military air routes, military aircraft responding to emergencies alerts will have to exercise additional caution in executing their missions. Military controllers will have to spend additional time and effort identifying aircraft that may be transiting military airspace. Military training missions may potentially be delayed or curtailed during the holiday season. None of these situations enhances the security of the homeland. The increased volume of air traffic is being created without a corresponding increase in the ability to safely monitor and track these aircraft. Additionally, any military aircraft responding to potential attacks or threats will have to waste precious time avoiding any civilian airliners traveling along one of their routes.

All of this could be palatable IF the lack of airspace were the real cause of the problem. Civilian airspace is managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which uses radar to observe and control civilian aircraft. Radar technology was first introduced by the British during World War II when it was discovered that radio signals could be bounced off of enemy aircraft. The bounced radio signals could be used to determine the location and heading of these aircraft. The basics of radar technology have remained the same despite improved technology. Early radar used for air traffic control would sweep (a term used to describe the rotational speed of the radar antenna) every 10 seconds. Approach radars sweep is every 5 seconds. With a modern jet airliner traveling at over 400 knots, and flight data for the radar updating only every 10 seconds, it becomes necessary to maintain a large separation between aircraft. Most civilian aircraft traveling under radar control must maintain a minimum horizontal separation of 2 nautical miles AND a minimum vertical separation of 5,000 feet. A near miss is anytime two aircraft come closer either vertically (altitude) or horizontally (distance) than these minimums.

The radar for controlling US airspace is woefully outdated. The radar system in place is pretty much the same system that has been in place since the 1960s. Aircraft are not truly controlled via radar either, aircraft are managed by their transponders. Transponders transmit a unique four digit signal (along with altimeter information) and are used in both tracking as well as collision avoidance. Newer satellite based technology exists which would give pilots far more accurate flight data than is presently available through radar and transponders. Safe distances between aircraft could be reduced as the satellite information would be constantly updated in real-time. However, Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology is expensive and would require a major retrofit of both FAA control centers as well as the cockpits of airliners.

Instead of meaningful dialog about ways to fund a replacement to the antiquated radar system, we hear about how airlines are increasing staff availability. Instead of partnering with our allies on retrofitting cockpits with GPS technology, we see the FAA posting more data about flight delays. There is even talk of a congestion pricing plan to discourage travel at peak hours. None of these “strategies” deals with the heart of the matter and more importantly none of the proposed measures does anything to increase security of the homeland. If airliners switched to GPS, it would not only reduce the amount of congestion in the airspace but it would also give military aircraft a tremendous advantage in tracking hijacked aircraft. Air routes could be used more efficiently and congestion could be quickly routed around delays or weather.

GPS is only part of the solution. The United States has not built a major airport since Denver International Airport opened in 1994. As of the time of this writing, no major airports are planned for the future. The increased amount of air travel creates not only congestion but huge crowds of people that could be attacked while waiting for their aircraft to arrive or depart. It wouldn’t take much, a fuel truck crashing through the main terminal or someone infected with a communicable disease (smallpox) walking around the awaiting passengers. The damage from an attack would be increase many fold by people attempting to flee from the area of attack. The attack would create huge delays as the effects of the attack cascade throughout the country. Multiple delays would be encountered and thousands more passengers would be stranded. The U.S. needs to create a strategic plan for addressing the major causes of air traffic delays and stop wasting time tracking symptomatic data points. Unchecked, the problem is not only one of inconvenience but one that also increases our vulnerability to another terrorist attack.

Agroterrorism

Agroterrorism is the use of a biological agent against crops, livestock, or poultry. Some possible pathogens include anthrax, brucellosis or wheat rust. The impact to our food supply and economy could be grave yet agroterrosim has not received as much attention as other terrorist scenarios. In part, this may be due to a bias on the part of planners who tend to focus on highly-populated urban areas. Most homeland security and counter-terrorism experts live in these areas so their assessments are more focused on urban centers. Of course these urban centers are completely dependent on food being grown and produced in rural areas and anything that affects the yield will impact urban areas as well.

Cincinnati is surrounded by counties that still have large scale farming operations. The city itself was once the butchering capital of the United States until the rail heads in Chicago (along with refrigerated railcars) made the windy city the nation’s butcher. Many urban workers live out in these counties and pass by the fields and farms without much consideration as to the linkage between the fields and the grocery store. We had very little rain this summer and most people only associate that with the lack of color in the fall leaves. A more severe draught, such as that experienced in Atlanta, can result in far more dire consequences.

We have seen already what happens when produce or meat are shipped contaminated with E. Coli. There is a significant impact to food supplies (driving up costs of related food items) as well as companies face increased screening protocols and even possible litigation. So far, the cases of contamination still appear to be accidental rather than intentional but regardless our food supply remains vulnerable.

The farms in the U.S. are very large in comparison to farms in other nations. American farmers manage huge multi-acre complexes often scattered throughout the county. Coupled with modern farming technology, farmers can produce an amazing yield of crops with a relatively small manpower pool. Livestock and poultry mega-farms similarly use technology to manage cattle, pigs and poultry with few workers. The risk though is with so few workers moving around mega-farms, there are times when fields and livestock not under immediate view of a farmer or worker. The potential then exists for a pathogen to be introduced into the fields or the feed. A terrorist could spray a field by simply walking or driving through a newly planted field.

Grains present multiple points where a pathogen or poison could be introduced. Harvested grains are gathered into semi-trailers and hauled to massive grain silos located near railroads. These facilities can be extremely huge and are usually in remote parts of the county. There is a potential that a pathogen could be somehow introduced along these routes.

Fields and grain silos (as well as large stockyards or poultry farms) are not what most physical security experts would call “hardened”. Animals and machinery need to be able to move about the fields and complexes with ease. Farmers face a greater risk of vandalism or theft than from the introduction of some kind of biological agent into the food they are producing. Potential or perceived risk is low and therefore expenditure of scare funds on surveillance systems does not make a lot of sense.

A well planned attack on our food supply however could have dire consequences. The first and most obvious consequence would be the creation of fear about the food we eat. Even for those Americans that grown or hunt their own food, at least some staples still need to be bought at the store. If shoppers stayed away from certain items, we could face a huge economic collapse as farmers, food processing plants, grocers, and truck drivers would be impacted by the reduced demand. An attack that coincided with a natural disaster (such as a drought, forest fire or flood) could be a huge force-multiplier. An already diminished yield compounded by shoppers avoiding suspected tainted food could spell economic disaster.

There is no easy, cost-effective solution to a potential agroterrorism attack. Despite that, security professionals and agriculture specialists need to begin a dialogue on how best to minimize a threat to our food systems. Many communities already are beginning to have exercises and training sessions. It will not be an easy task as each region will have unique challenges and vulnerabilities. A regional approach though remains the best as utilizing the knowledge of individuals from those areas will be key to developing the best solutions. It also helps when planners have a vested interest in protecting their neighbors and friends.

The right to privacy?

The issue of privacy and ones right to it has been in the news lately. The second in command at the Director of Intelligence, Donald Kerr, made the startling proclamation that anonymity is gone and privacy is perhaps best understood as the rules and restrictions over what the government can do with information about you. The assumption here is that by going on-line you are consciously sharing information and therefore you should not (at least in his mind) find monitoring by intelligence agencies objectionable. Much of our “private” information is available through the Internet some now feel that anonymity, and therefore privacy, are already obsolete concepts.

Some may find it surprising that there is no specific “right to privacy” in the U.S. Constitution. Constitutional scholars have argued whether or not the omission is problematic. It is obvious that the Constitution does have an interest in maintaining certain aspects of privacy. For instance, the First Amendment is protection of private beliefs. The Third Amendment protects the privacy of the home from being used to garrison troops. The Fourth Amendment is protection from unreasonable searches. The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination, the closest to an actual right to privacy. In addition, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain rights" in the Bill of Rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." While none actually comes out and states a right to privacy, it is seems the U.S. Constitution was framed with many protections that were simply unheard of in European monarchies.

Why the deputy Director of Intelligence would risk making such a statement that seems to be unsupported by the U.S. Constitution seemed like a mystery until today. A story appearing on the National Terror Alert website concerns a woman who worked for both the FBI and CIA yet was in the country illegally. She admitted to using fraudulent documents to obtain her U.S. citizenship before going to work for the agencies. The case could spark a renewed call for increasing oversight of workers by U.S. spy agencies (whether they currently work for the federal government or not is irrelevant, they MIGHT become federal employees some day). The story goes on to mention how the woman conducted at least two illegal computer searches while a federal agent. Despite urges for caution, I can see where federal agencies will begin a renewed call demanding increased surveillance authority over individuals of interest.

A hurried approach to implementing additional authorities granting less restrictive surveillance has implications beyond just the federal government. Contractors providing services to the federal government may have to spend additional money screening their workers for background checks. Workers who previously had access to federal information may be subject to restraining orders similar to what intelligence analysts have to sign swearing to never, ever share any information. The costs associated with tracking and monitoring all of these individuals and their information could become quite high. The potential scrutiny of any individual at any time with no-notice could be quite alarming.

People now share personal information with amazing alacrity (sometimes this alacrity backfires when their files get sent to other than the intended recipient). A small lapse in judgment, an alcohol induced impulse, or a sudden bout of spite could result in information being posted that catches the interest of a particular agency. If the equipment used happens to belong to a company or corporation, the employers may find themselves equally culpable. Companies could end-up spending large amounts of their operating budgets screening and monitoring their employees behaviors even more in the future. In a related manner, the Scotts Company recently fired an employee who tested positive for tobacco. Scotts has a strict no tobacco use policy in place at its offices and manufacturing plants. However this individual claims he only used tobacco when he went home and never on the job. Scotts has maintained that its policy is in effect regardless. The case is still being reviewed at this time but shows how employers are now beginning to hold employees accountable for behavior outside of the workplace.

The potential for the monitoring of employees personal time poses a slippery slope. Governing behavior when an employee is not on the clock could damage a company’s ability to recruit a viable workforce. Inappropriately sharing such information with future employers or law enforcement agencies could jeopardize a company’s standing in the community and thus bottom line. Failure to share information about a potential risk could be equally disastrous to a company’s bottom line. The recent incidents involving toys containing harmful substances could shed some very harsh light if companies were aware of unsafe practices but chose to ignore them for whatever reason.

New York wants to give illegal immigrants the ability to apply for driver’s licenses. The rationale is it will make the streets safer as people here illegally will now have to pass a driver’s exam. I just don’t see how that is going to make the streets safer. A few years ago, we had a drunk driver arrested for the 19th time! He had long ago had his driver’s license suspended yet he still found ways to get access to a car. He was not deterred by not having a driver’s license. While I don’t see the New York initiative impacting safety, I do see the initiative tempting some officials or agencies with using that information to monitor individuals they may suspect of being potential terrorists. The potential for abuse is great and the return on investment miniscule.

Access to greater amounts of information does not lead to better decisions. At times, the expectation of having so much information can lead to a paralysis when there gaps in the information. We don’t need additional data sets to predict behavior. We need better trained analysts allowed to think outside the box without regard to convention or political expediency.

Railroad Hazards

A story appeared yesterday in the Columbus Dispatch yesterday about a new siren being installed to warn citizens in the event of a train derailment. The siren is the same type found throughout the state for warning people of dangerous storms and other hazards. The Columbus siren is unique in that from the start its primary purpose is to warn of possible hazardous materials from train accidents. The community has been pursuing a siren for ten years according the article at a cost of $25, 000. The city of Columbus partnered with Georgia Pacific (which operates the railroad in the vicinity of the siren) to acquire the new system.

The story reminded me of a railroad crossing in the town I live in. A few years ago, a woman was killed in her car at a railroad crossing. The crossing in on a two-lane country road and does not have a signal, only signs. The accident occurred early in the morning with a heavy fog. The investigators concluded that the driver never saw the train. The accident generated a local effort to have a signal installed at this crossing. Despite the efforts and the potential danger, it will take almost ten years to get a signal installed. First an analysis of the area needs to be done. It takes two to three years to gather the data and assess the type of signal that needs to be installed. It will then take several more years once the signal type is identified to find a funding source (it will cost around $15-25,000 in today’s dollars). I’m not criticizing the railroad or the process, merely pointing out the cost and time required to make things happen.

In the Tri-State area, there are approximately 190 sirens to warn people of storm and other dangers. Replacing just a single siren can run as much as $15,000. Most municipalities have to plan for such a large expenditure in future years as budgets are tight and surpluses are almost unheard of. Obviously a destroyed siren or one needing immediate replacement is eligible for emergency funding yet this still is a time consuming process. People need to be aware of their surroundings and that signaling devices may not exist or may be damaged. Normally, there is some advance notice about storms (such as weather reports) but trains are a sometimes overlooked hazard that may be right outside your door.

Railroads run almost in a parallel universe to the rest of the world. Modern trains move their huge payloads with a silence that belies their mass. Railroads make up a meandering river of steel dissecting the local geography and roadways. It is only when our travel along one of these roadways is blocked at a railroad crossing that we stop to consider modern trains. Many Cincinnatians for example would be very surprised to learn that the Queensgate Yard (which lies west of I-75 and Northwest of Downtown) is one of the largest rail classification facilities in North American. There are over 70 miles of track making up the yard which is over five miles long. Queensgate Yard railroad classification yard is a type known as a “hump yard”. The heart of these yards is the hump: a lead track on a hill (hump) over which the cars are pushed by the engine. Single cars, or some coupled cars in a block, are uncoupled just before or at the crest of the hump and roll by gravity into their destination tracks in the classification bowl (the tracks where the cars are sorted). These are the largest and most effective classification yards with the largest shunting capacity — often several thousand cars a day.

As trains bring cars into the yard, they are sorted and new trains are constructed and sent out. The amount of traffic in and out of the yard is enormous yet most people don’t even realize the magnitude of tonnage being moved every day. The yard doesn’t exist in a vacuum as several lines feed it from the North and South. Each of these lines in turns runs through various communities throughout the Tri-State area. Anywhere along these routes a derailment could mean a potential hazardous material spill. It is surprising at times to see how close railroads run near populated areas. Railroads do a very good job of tracking their freight and maintaining the rails however accidents still happen.

Safety and security professionals need to be aware of the hazardous a nearby rail line can pose. For instance, a security professional at a major corporation may need to consider how to lock down a building in the event a railcar carrying poisonous gas tips over. The public safety director at a retirement community may need to realize a rail line a few miles away could still be close enough to pose an inhalation hazards for the residents. A potential home buyers needs to look at local railroad maps to see where nearby tracks may pass. Trains carry huge amounts of payload, sometimes toxic, which could poison the air or water tables near your home. Community planners need to have evacuation procedures in place in the event of a chemical spill.

The big scenario for most safety and security professionals to strategize is how to handle the detonation of a dirty bomb in their area. The validity of such an exercise varies depending on the locality but there is a much more serious threat that exists. Nuclear waste is often moved by train (sometimes referred to a “glow trains”). For obvious reasons, the information concerning the movement of these trains is classified. Some assumptions though can be made. For instance, due to the high risk of these trains the routes most likely to be followed through remote areas whenever possible. On one hand, this reduces the risk of a radiation hazard in the event of a derailment. On the other hand, these smaller communities are less likely to have the necessary response training and equipment. It seems a more realistic training scenario than would be to train for a potential spill of nuclear waste rather than a dirty bomb.

To bring this all back to where I started, it is more imperative that safety and security professionals (as well as concerned citizens) are aware of the hazardous in their immediate area. Warning sirens and signals may not be available in all cases to warn of the dangers posed by a nearby railroad.

Diseases

Dayton recently had a case of leprosy confirmed. The woman was only identified as a middle-aged immigrant woman. Leprosy is often thought of as a biblical scourge that is no longer part of the modern lexicon. Leprosy has not been eradicated and in the United States there have been 47 cases so far this year according to the Center for Disease Control. While certainly not a epidemic, the Dayton case should remind us how modern travel can quickly move a disease from a remote part of the world to another within a matter of hours.

The very fact that we are only a plane ride away from some very dangerous diseases gets overlook with talk about avian flu. Avian flu, or H5N1, is most likely to cause the next flu pandemic IF it ever mutates into a variant able to transfer from human-to-human. On the other hand, bubonic plague is endemic in isolated areas in the Southwestern United states. Human infection occurs if the person is bitten by a flea carrying the disease. Fleas get the disease from biting rodents infected with the disease. Although isolated for now, if an infected rat or flea got into a more populated area of the United States and outbreak would surely occur.

Malaria is a mosquito-borne disease caused by a parasite. People with malaria often experience fever, chills, and flu-like illness. Left untreated, they may develop severe complications and die. Each year 350-500 million cases of malaria occur worldwide, and over one million people die, most of them young children in sub-Saharan Africa. In the United States, 893 cases have been reported this year.

Ebola virus, or hemorrhagic fever, poses a unique hazard. Infections with Ebola virus are acute. There is no carrier state. Because the natural reservoir of the virus is unknown, the manner in which the virus first appears in a human at the start of an outbreak has not been determined. However, researchers have hypothesized that the first patient becomes infected through contact with an infected animal. After the first case-patient in an outbreak setting is infected, the virus can be transmitted in several ways. People can be exposed to Ebola virus from direct contact with the blood and/or secretions of an infected person. Thus, the virus is often spread through families and friends because they come in close contact with such secretions when caring for infected persons. People can also be exposed to Ebola virus through contact with objects, such as needles, that have been contaminated with infected secretions. An infected individual could board an aircraft and fly into a highly populated area before symptoms are noticed.

These are some of the more frightening diseases that could be transported via an unsuspecting human host. But as we have seen in the news our food supplies are vulnerable to poor hygienic practices resulting in recent outbreaks of E. Coli. As afar as we know, these were all accidental but that may not always be the case. Professor Larry Wein of Stanford University estimates an intentional attack on our food supply could result in 100,000 deaths. Milk and cattle are especially vulnerable due to number of people that consume these products as well as the openness of most livestock farms. For example, a cattle ranch in Kansas has 18,000 head of cattle. Their feed could be tainted with some type of toxin or the animals could be injected. Ranchers are taking this threat seriously and are beginning to protect their ranches and farms with new technology.

It stands to reason if livestock could be the targets of a terrorist attack, orchards or fields of produce are even easier to taint. With livestock the terrorist would have to introduce some type of toxin that would not immediately kill the animal or show signs of infection before it were slaughtered. Produce offers a greater ranged of pathogens that could be introduced that would not kill the vegetable or fruit. Large super farms have hundreds of acres of crops that are left largely unguarded. As most crops are washed before shipping, the pathogen would have to be something that is absorbed into the crop through the soil. Or as had happened already, the pathogen could be introduced at the packaging plant. Farmers and growers will have to become even more aware of the potential for terrorists to use their produce as a weapon. Safety and security for farmers is growing beyond simply worrying about vandals and thieves.

The intentional introduction of a disease or pathogen into our food supply may seem like the stuff of novels, however the threat is very real. Unlike other weapons of mass destruction, attacking our food supplies could be done with little risk of the terrorist dying before his or her mission is completed. Regarding diseases, if terrorists are able to recruit young people and convince them to become suicide bombers, then it does not appear to be a stretch to intentionally infect someone with a contagious disease. Imagine a terrorist purposely being infected with smallpox and then flying into a major airport. While there, he or she goes around and touches as many people as possible. It would be a low tech approach to committing germ warfare.

Cincinnati is blessed with a large number of world-class hospitals on both sides of the Ohio River. The cause for concern is not if doctors would be able to identify the cause of an outbreak but rather how long. Cincinnati has many direct non-stop flights daily with passengers arriving from around the world. What gets overlooked is the number of cargo flights that bring in food stuff from other parts of the world. Whether intentional or accidental, Cincinnati could be facing something far worse than an outbreak of leprosy

Illegal Immigration

The 2008 Presidential election finds candidates in both parties struggling with the issue of illegal immigration. The general consensus seems to be some type of either active measure (such as increased border security) to more passive measures (such as granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants). Earlier this year, the White House released its list of initiatives to improve border security within the existing laws. The White House listed 26 major initiatives under five major headings (border security, interior enforcement, worksite enforcement, streamlining existing guest-worker programs, improving immigration, assimilation).

There are some assumptions to most of these arguments that the presence of illegal immigrants makes us less secure. The majority of the active measures seem to be focused on the Southwest border with Mexico. It stands to reason that a porous border is a potential breech in our homeland security efforts. The solution by the DHS is to pursue walls, fences, increased Border Patrol agents, and new technology for monitoring the border. Anyone who has studied the Maginot Line (a line of fortifications constructed by France along its border with Germany and Italy after WWI) or other static defenses understands the ineffectiveness of fortifying our border with Mexico. Namely, a static defense can be defeated simply by avoiding it either by going around or under. The United States has spent a large amount of money and manpower to erect various barriers along the border in the most populated areas. The efforts to date though only cover a small fraction of the 2,000 miles that make up the border with Mexico. Aircraft and other surveillance systems are in-place (with more being purchased and deployed daily) to monitor border crossings. Despite this impressive amount of hardware and manpower, we still have people illegally entering the US through the border with Mexico.

The problem, in my opinion, is incorrectly framed as a security problem instead of an economic problem. The reason people are crossing the border is predominantly to work and not to commit acts of terrorism. Obviously if you are able to able to enter the country illegally to work, there is a potential for those with a desire to commit terrorism to enter the same way. I find this hard to believe though as the profile of a terrorist in the 21st Century tends to a young, well-educated male who is disenfranchised with society. It is this person who is most likely to be recruited by al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. These individuals come from affluent families and the terrorist groups have good financial sourcing. It would seem unlikely and unnecessary for the terrorist groups to risk losing an trained operative during a failed border crossing attempt.

If the problem with illegal immigration is about economic conditions south of the border, perhaps a realistic approach would be to take away the economic incentives. Most talk along these lines is about penalizing U.S. businesses that use illegal immigrants. Such punitive measure fails to provide a disincentive on the Mexican side of the border and people will continue to cross. If we truly are concerned about illegal immigrants as a security threat then we need to stop them BEFORE they cross the border. People are willing to endure much if the incentives and perceived rewards outweigh the hardships. Creating more opportunities on the Mexican side of the border (and this means not just Mexico, but Central and South America as well) is the true way of stopping the flow of illegal immigrants.

I haven’t seen any serious discussions about creating more economic incentives on the Mexican side of the border. If more people could earn a decent wage in Mexico, it would reduce the incentive for people to cross illegally into the United States. Less flow of people may also reduce the likelihood of people wanting to smuggle contraband. The now forgotten war on drugs has attempted to prevent drugs from South American and Mexico from entering the United States for years. The incentives are just to great however to keep determined smugglers from by-passing law enforcement interdiction efforts. The same principle applies to illegal immigration, with no hope of earning a decent wage at their present location people will travel to wherever they can make a living for themselves and their families.

While we are on this topic, I'd also like to convey the situation concerning Latino gangs in a slightly different manner. Mara Salvatrucha or MS 13 has been portrayed in the news as the latest scourge posing a danger to the homeland. Certainly MS 13 is an extremely dangerous organization but the true origins of MS 13 gets little airtime. MS 13 members are mainly Salvadorans or Hondurans and thus it is assumed this gang was created in Central American and their members infiltrated the US. MS 13 was formed in the US penal system by Salvadorans and as the US deported these members back to El Salvador, MS 13 was able to recruit additional members and begin a campaign of terror in the homeland. (On a related note, West Coast gangs first came to St Louis as a result of sending juvenile offenders to correction facilities in Joliet. Kids learned the gang system while in prison and when they were released, brought the gangs to St Louis). Deportation of members out of the US seems to have the increased, rather than decreased, the influence and manpower of MS 13. The US has long been seen by Central and South America as indifferent at best and exploitative at worst. The practice of sending hardened gangs members back to El Salvador isn't helping improve that perception and might even be damaging our efforts at providing security for the homeland.

Before we spend additional dollars to hire more border agents or buy the latest high-tech detection platform, perhaps a better use of funding would be to engage with Mexico and Central America on some type of economic develop to reduce the conditions that encourages illegal immigration.

The Banks

The Banks is a proposed 18-acre neighborhood district on Cincinnati's riverfront between Paul Brown Stadium and Great American Ball Park. The Banks is Cincinnati’s attempt to create a vibrant destination on North side of the Ohio River. Over the years, Covington and Newport have successfully attracted the types of businesses on the South side that Cincinnati has longed for. The Banks has been planned for nearly 10 years yet the vision continues to change. The latest version envisions up to 1,800 apartments and condominiums, up to 400,000 square feet of retail space, up to 1 million square feet of office space and up to 400,000 square feet of hotel space.

Local citizens have weighed on a various concepts for the Banks. Most want some type of entertainment and leisure activity to be the primary focus. Of these, some type of sports-centric theme is the order of the day. Others see the Banks more as a created neighborhood with a style attractive to affluent residents looking for an urban lifestyle. Regardless of the vision, the Banks seems to finally be on track with ground breaking occurring sometime in early 2008 and occupancy beginning in 2009.

I had resisted about writing about the Banks even though hardly a day goes by without some news item in the local paper or news broadcasts. The concept has finally settled enough where I felt there was something of interest from a safety and security standpoint. While that is my area of interest, I’m somewhat skeptical that planners for the Banks will take some of these into consideration as they develop their final concept. I say that from a purely economic approach. The planners’ first priority is a development plan guaranteed to provide a return on investment. The look and layout of the Banks has to appeal both to developers as well as prospective residents and business owners. Safety and security concerns, while certainly not to be ignored, will be addressed only to the extent necessary to insure compliance without aversely impacting any return on investment. Any safety or security measure that means reduced revenue will most likely be discarded (unless laws or local codes compel otherwise).

The Banks will be situated between the two sports arenas downtown with the confluence of two major Interstates immediately to its north (Fort Washington Way) and the Ohio River immediately to the South. The geography means that at best, the Banks will only be accessible via three approaches (north, east, and west). Boaters may have access from the Ohio River but the majority of traffic will be land-based. Any east/west access is going to add additional traffic problems to the five bridges that cross the Ohio River near downtown. Access from the North will be very difficult with little room to design access due to the presence of Fort Washington Way.

Planners need to think through carefully about first responders access during a crisis response. The location does not lend itself to swift and efficient evacuation especially during peak use times. The Banks location means it will be exposed to any natural disaster or terrorist attack to adjacent sites (such as Paul Brown Stadium, Great American Ball Park, or the downtown area). Residents in the Banks could find themselves stranded as a tornado or fire creates gridlock in and around their locality. A crisis in any of the adjacent areas means casualties within the Banks will most likely have to air evacuated out. (A helipad for medical air rescue helicopters would be a nice and easy addition to the grounds.) If proper egress routes are not planned during the concept stage, gridlock will be too severe for emergency vehicles to navigate in a timely manner.

It may not even take a disaster to make this point. Paul Brown Stadium seats just over 65,000 fans. Great American Ball Park seats approximately 42,000 fans. Getting out of downtown Cincinnati after a game lets out is a very slow process. It only takes one accident on a bridge or exit ramp to really start jamming up the traffic flow. If access routes to the Banks overlook these chokepoints (without coming up with a viable alternate) this could mean residents will quickly grow disenchanted with the Banks.

One of the major appeals to living on the river will be the view. The Ohio River begins at the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers at the Point in Pittsburgh, PA, and flows 981 miles to join the Mississippi at Cairo, Ill. The Ohio River accounts for over one-third of the maritime cargo moving inland in the United States each year, (approximately 275 million tons) and by comparison handles more cargo per year than the Panama Canal. With this much traffic, there is a potential for a disaster involving toxic chemicals or an explosion. In the past, the risk along the banks would be primarily industrial areas or office areas downtown. Now with a residential area that could be ground-zero, emergency response planners will have additional challenges to evacuating victims and casualties. Developers need to work with emergency planners now to minimize the risk to both residents of the Banks as well as the first responders that may have to come and rescue them.

Up until now I’ve focused on accidents and natural disasters, however there is an additional concern that the Banks poses for Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky. The very location and nature of the Banks makes it a target for a terrorist attack or the base for an attack. For the same reasons the Banks poses disaster response challenges, a terrorist attack (or threat of attack) could completely gridlock both sides of the river. In addition to the casualties, such an attack would disrupt major economic activities in the regions. Offices would have to evacuate and close. River traffic would have to be stopped. The Interstates may be closed or rerouted. The potential economic damage could be severe. Some kind of attack could be attempted from the Banks targeting either stadium or the downtown. Merely the threat of attack would cause the region to go into a defensive posture interrupting key governmental and economic activities. An actual attack could leave the region economically crippled for years.

The Banks could be the catalyst to providing Cincinnati the economic recovery that has eluded the area for years. Properly planned and executed, the Banks could provide the incentive for tired downtown workers to spend more of their leisure time in Cincinnati rather than fleeing to the suburbs at quitting time. However, the additional risk to the safety and security of Cincinnati posed by the Banks is something that needs to be addressed while concepts are still in draft form.