Ohio State To Require Sophomores To Live On Campus
January 14, 2013 7:18 pm at 7:18 pm #529867
That’s all true. I guess my focus has been narrower by trying convince the University Area Review Board and the University Area Commission not to spread the student infrastructure of group homes to Weinland Park. The issue has been that neither body thinks that the student lifestyle is a problem. Consequently, as far as they’re concerned there’s really no reason to do anything differently than they have done for past twenty years. And that’s the real problem is that the powers that be don’t think that there is a problem with trash, parking or riots in the University District. Maybe it’s time for a UAC 2:00 A.M. outing to P.J’s?January 14, 2013 7:21 pm at 7:21 pm #529868
Sophmores have been required to live on campus for decades, it just hasn’t been enforced as OSU didn’t have the dorm space.January 15, 2013 1:15 pm at 1:15 pm #529869
I think part of the problem is that things that are tolerated in the University District (crazy parties, lots of trash, sun bathing on porch roofs, passing out on front lawns, upholstered lawn furniture, etc) would not be in other neighborhoods. Who would want to live near that?
That’s kind of a strange way to phrase that. Those things are not “tolerated” – they are the activities that the tenants who live in those homes choose to participate in, and they are well within their rights to do so. Neither the landlord nor the police would be permitted, much less obligated, to stop them. Tenants are afforded certain rights of enjoyment (of their home) under Ohio law, and you don’t get to trample on those just because you don’t like them or their demographic. Unless of course those activities become illegal (or loud enough to interfere with a neighbor tenant or homeowner’s quiet enjoyment of his own home) – in which case the police would handle it.
You may not like the things students like to do in their free time, but the landlords don’t really have anything to do with that. Not that campus landlords aren’t guilty of any number of other transgressions though!January 15, 2013 1:25 pm at 1:25 pm #529870
^ how many sunbathers do you reckon those porch roofs were designed for?
on a side note:
littering, public intoxication and noise complaints are probably as much common sense as they are municipal infractions.January 15, 2013 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #529871
campus area might look scummy but even with last years “crime spree” I feel a hell of a lot safer walking around that neighborhood than some close by others. I’d rather the cops focus on that.
porch couches > crack dealers
let them live.January 15, 2013 3:03 pm at 3:03 pm #529872
Neither the landlord nor the police would be permitted, much less obligated, to stop them.
Oh, please. Of course landlords are “permitted” to stop bad behavior of their tenants. I am a landlord and because I care about the effect of my rental on its neighbors there’s a clause in my lease that states that tenants can be evicted if they disturb the neighbors. I choose tenants who I believe are unlikely to cause problems of that kind, and I’m fully prepared to evict tenants who did end up causing those problems.January 15, 2013 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #529873
You can write whatever you want in your lease, but that does not mean a judge will uphold it as a legal contract. Tenants have a right to do (mostly) what they please.
You will not be able to evict a tenant for being loud, I guarantee it.January 15, 2013 7:24 pm at 7:24 pm #529874
Ok, if you can’t put it in your lease. There’s limited code enforcement and the police often have better things to do than babysit whose job is it to instill some semblance of civilized behavior in ones student neighbors?January 15, 2013 7:40 pm at 7:40 pm #529875
Unfortunately Peter is correct. You can put whatever you want in the lease but is very difficult to evict someone in Columbus for anything other than non payment of rent. I know this first hand. The key is to really check people out before you rent to them. For landlords who don’t care the only thing the neighborhood can do is call the police enough times to be able to threaten to have the property nuisance abated. Takes forever and a lot of work, but it can be done. But then you have a boarded up house, which sometimes is better than what you had before.January 15, 2013 7:42 pm at 7:42 pm #529876
Vestanpance is right, the police have better things to do and code enforcement has 3 officers for the entire UD area with a giant backlog of complaints. Generally speaking they don’t look for trouble they just respond to complaints they receive.
Similar to the broken window theory, I think all it takes is a few bad houses on a street to keep traditional middle class renters (let alone families) away. I doubt sophomores moving back on campus will change the character of the neighborhood much. Even the students that live in campus dorms ‘play’ in the off campus areas of the UD.
The cost of dorm living is still very expensive as are the new apartments going up. Even with raises in rent the old housing stock in the south campus areas will remain the affordable alternative. That they are still targeting students on Indianola near 7th makes it seem that the campus landlords aren’t really worried.
I am saying this as someone who loves the proximity of the area to so many things. I would love it if moving the sophomores created some major changes, but I doubt it will.January 15, 2013 8:14 pm at 8:14 pm #529877
That they are still targeting students on Indianola near 7th makes it seem that the campus landlords aren’t really worried.
I think there’s a fine line between worry and wishful thinking there. The guy that owns those predicts a bloodbath in the campus rental market if the sophomore rule happens. The question is what do you with a house that’s been converted to 10 bedrooms without a yard?January 15, 2013 8:33 pm at 8:33 pm #529878
That is a good point and one that begins with the damage already done. I am not sure how costly it would be to reconfigure those houses. My guess is that they would look to bringing in students from other campuses (CCAD, CSCC, etc) and others of that age range who would be enamored by the student infrastructure in the area (everything from tattoo parlors to hookah joints). To someone in there early 20′s campus is a cool place to live. :uJanuary 16, 2013 2:03 pm at 2:03 pm #529879
I think there’s a fine line between worry and wishful thinking there. The guy that owns those predicts a bloodbath in the campus rental market if the sophomore rule happens. The question is what do you with a house that’s been converted to 10 bedrooms without a yard?
Remember that much of Vic Village and Dennison place was full of student tenements (that high density so many seem to love) and that many of the old house were carved up into multiple units. Part of the revitalization of the neighborhood was down zoning to single family houses. I expect that something similar could happen on campus, but it will take a lot of effort from the University commission, code enforcement, and OSU. Hope springs eternal.January 16, 2013 2:30 pm at 2:30 pm #529880
Dennison Place is a good example of what could happen. And you’re right it will take a lot of effort from the UAC, code enforcement and OSU. Unfortunately, the UAC voted against supporting the sophomore rule and I believe the University District is down to two fairly overwhelmed code enforcement officers. So, I don’t see any help coming from the commission or the city. Ohio State and the Weinland Park Collaborative are the wild cards. While it would be nice to see houses reversed from student tenements I’d be thrilled just to see more houses not converted into new student tenements in the University District. And that’s been a losing battle so far.January 18, 2013 1:07 am at 1:07 am #529881
Dennison Place is a good example of what could happen. And you’re right it will take a lot of effort from the UAC, code enforcement and OSU. Unfortunately, the UAC voted against supporting the sophomore rule and I believe the University District is down to two fairly overwhelmed code enforcement officers. So, I don’t see any help coming from the commission or the city. Ohio State and the Weinland Park Collaborative are the wild cards. While it would be nice to see houses reversed from student tenements I’d be thrilled just to see more houses not converted into new student tenements in the University District. And that’s been a losing battle so far.
OSU has plans to have their own inspectors look into off campus housing that students are in as a service to students and safety measure beginning this summer.
There also is legal aid available for students that feel they have been unfairly charged (security deposits, etc).
The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.