RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
An article in today’s Dispatch is reporting that a proposal from Franklin County commissioners would provide a $3 million investment towards the demolition of City Center and development of the Columbus Commons project, but would also set aside six acres of the nine acre site for permanent park space.
The demolition of the mall is already underway (photo updates here) and the Franklin County Commissioners are scheduled to discuss this new plan on Thursday. What do you think of this new proposal?
I feel like downtown Columbus is getting more and more of a suburban feel to.. it something the few urban downtown dwellers do not want.
I don’t really understand the angst here. What would be an appropriate green space size then? 4 acres? 2? A typical city block is 2-2.5 acres, so we’re quibbling over a couple of blocks?
I don’t know of any city regretting setting aside too much green space, but I know of a lot of regrettable development (including the thing being torn down to make the green space).
The problem is Columbus has enough green open spaces I can understand if downtown was like NY and needed the space to relax but there are so many other options to choose from.
Jergarr27 Says: I’m disappointed with this new development.
This is just a proposal at this point. Nothing is set in stone.
Walker, you have seen the renderings already?
Also, isn’t 33% of the site being set aside for development already being considered prior to this announcement?
I will take a wait and see approach for the time being.
I personally dont really think the size of the park @ 6 acres is problematic. I’m more concerned about what’s going to happen at the edges. If the 6 acres can be bounded by nice architecture on the east, town street and rich street to the north and south, and high street to the west, id be happy. This will hopefully lead to high quality redevelopment on the west side of high street, the third street edge, and the northern edge along a reconnected town street.
Two keys from my perspective: Keep the edges active with public street frontage (social surveillance) and make sure there is a nice “frame” of architecture. The worst thing that could happen IMO is that the park feels secluded; or a back yard for the proposed condos on east side of high street that were shown in the last plan.
I also don’t understand what the big deal is it’s only 6 acres yep a few blocks. I would like to see development outlaying the park. I would prefer to not have a temporary park. If were going to have a park then lets have it. The park can offer more opportunities for Programs and festivals as well as gatherings.
What does anyone think should be there? More condos? Why can’t developments line the park not take it over?
Another park is just not necessary with all the existing parks outside downtown fallling into shambles because the mayor and Downtown Columbus are trying to create a suburb that does not currently exist downtown. We need big buildings, businesses, and shopping with the housing being incidental to the former, just like in other major cities. If this become a park area at all, let it be at the expense of private developers who will line the thing with nice office buildings with retail on the ground floor. Then stop giving tax abatements to condo buyers which return nothing to the city coffers, but rather give those tax abatements to businesses to get them to once again relocate downtown. It can be done. If they stay on this suburbanizing downtown thing, by the time they get done with the place it will look as fake as Easton or downtown New Albany … lets keep downtown urban.
i’m glad SOMETHING is going to happen to the city center site and all, but what is our obsession with all these parks? I would much rather feel safe walking along a brightly lit street lined with buildings and shops and people than a dark park. I’m glad buildings are lining high street, but this proposal would shrink those buildings and continue to limit the opportunity for development. This is a huge swath of downtown that we are throwing towards parks. I would much rather have more buildings.
This is what the finished project should look like.
http://citynoise.org/upload/29123.jpg
I can live with a permanent 6 acres, however I would have taken almost all 9 of it a new “central park”. There are more than enough parking lots and underdeveloped properties within one or two blocks of the park that need some attention. Focus on those first and build around the park, making it a centerpiece of sorts. Build out Riversouth. That’s a dense urban neighborhood screaming to happen.
I agree with one of the posters above, downtown is beginning to look like suburbia with all of these lowrise buildings with no ground level retail and little to no aesthetic appeal. Is it too much to ask for something that is Dwell, UrbanLand or Metropolis worthy. I’m so tired of mediocracy.
Good examples of urban parks;
-a planned central park in Oklahoma City, atlhough a bit big for comparison at 70 acres. I still think all 9 of Columbus Commons should be permanant park space with worldclass art installations. I mean seriously, it’s 9 acres in a sea of parking lots.
-Citygarden in St. Louis; more than just trees, grass and flowerbeds.
-Campus Martius in Detroit. Just the thought of saying Detroit as a good anything makes me want to puke.
-Portland’s numerous urban parks, many of which provide interactive features.
-Millenium Park; need I say more
STEP IT UP COLUMBUS. Go big or stay home. You have to be one of the big boys to play with the big boys.
Walker I agree with your point of view on this one. I appreciate your straight forward stance on the issue.
Whether it’s 3 acres or 6 acres, I’m most concerned with how the park relates to the surrounding development. I assume this would mean fewer liner buildings facing the park. That would mean fewer windows facing the park, and fewer high-value properties with a view of the park. It could also mean fewer built-in users of the park and fewer people watching over the park out windows, which could mean less security.
6 acres is barely a park – it’s more like a lawn. That’s less than 1/5 the size of Goodale.
Really people?
Downtown needs more greenspace and 6 acres is not a very large site. (think 1/5th of Goodale Park) There is plenty of vacant/underutilized land that can be developed in other areas of downtown. I’m glad metro parks is finally investing money in the central city. Now if we can just convince them to take over Franklin Park. I would like to see more of the green space front High St. It seems a bit silly to hide the park behind buildings.
It seems that Columbus Commons which is only two blocks away from Bicentennial Park on the Scioto Mile is somewhat duplicative in design with both parks featuring permanent performing arts stages. Why not diversify the design of these two urban parks instead of replicating the design, especially given their close proximity? Perhaps Columbus Commons could include an ice skating rink (or skate boarding rink) like Rockefeller Center in New York. Part of the concern expressed about our downtown becoming another suburb is legitimate and unfortunately is in my opinion the result of the principal decisionmakers largely being suburbanites and not knowing any better.
Anyone who thinks “just buildings” is going to get the job of revitalization in downtown done is fooling themselves.
I like the fact that this feels intentional– creating a park where there is a *need* for a park, rather than just sticking a park on the edges of a district where there is available land. Land that is available– because no one uses it.
This is probably the last, best opportunity for Columbus to develop a wonderful downtown park that lies in the center of the beating heart of the city. A community space. A gathering place. We need that mix, not on the edge of town, but in the center. We don’t have the interconnectivity across the river to make the river parks a “central” feature.
And to prove my point: has anyone been to bicentennial park to hang out when there hasn’t been a festival or event there? Ok then… how may people have been by City Center and seen how the demolition is coming along?
Having lived across the street from Bicentennial Park for nearly 15 years, I have personal knowledge of many families and young lovers using the park throughout the summer. With the addition of a restaurant (including liquor license) and outside terrace space facing the proposed state-of-the-art fountains a la Bellagio in Las Vegas, I can assure you that many more people will be spending time in the park, exclusive of the major festivals.
P.S. I find it interesting that Columbusites do not consider the 10-acre statehouse grounds located in the center of downtown (Broad and High Streets) to be sufficient green space for day-time or weekend concerts, dog walking, kick ball games, and other park-like activity. The statehouse management has made a concerted effort to advertise this great open space as downtown’s backyard. With some minor enhancements such as outdoor tables and chairs and the like, it could offer the very same things as Columbus Commons in terms of what has been proposed so far, albeit with some spectacular architecture surrounding it.
@Aunt madge How can a downtown area be suburban? Contradictory. There are tons of green-spaces throughout Manhattan, and we would do well to follow that pattern. Suburban would be sprawling low rises, not a park surrounded by multi-story, multi-use buildings. Easton is a New Urbanist development. Such developments, by definition, try to recreate an urban environment.
Thory Says:
Easton is a New Urbanist development.
I don’t think New Urbanism had anything to do with Easton.