A lot of these 'graduate' apartment complexes are marketed to foriegn graduate students who set up there housing prior to arrival. This is only a portion of the renters, but few of these usually have cars.
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion
Proposed Campus Development
[92 posts] [28 contributors]





Rate this topic:
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
There are always going to be exceptions for people who absolutely need cars, but in general, most don’t (esp. freshman and sophomores). If you need a car don’t live in this complex or live with roommates who don’t have/need cars. There are a lot of other answers to this issue other than “make the developer spend more money on parkingâ€Â. Like I said before, at OU there def. was not a 1:1 parking ratio and we all made it work without too much pain.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Cookie wrote >>
Walker wrote >>
What's the problem?There are students who live on campus who need to work for more than beer money, and their employment opportunities are limited if their transportation options are limited.
True, but that doesn't necessarily justify a 1:1 car ratio. That just means that the UD should not become a completely car-free zone. While dense, the UD still covers a great deal of ground; Columbus is a land-rich city. There are room for dozens of car-free, high-density, mixed-use developments on or near High in the UD, while still leaving many more traditional off-campus housing options (including parking behind buildings reached via alleys, as well as street parking, the two dominant modes of off-campus student parking) near the major one-way arteries (Summit and 4th) that are much more friendly to commuters anyway.
Don't look at just this one development. Look at the overall fabric of the UD with and without this development. I think the proposal (and many more like it, for that matter) would be a significant improvement.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Cookie wrote >>
gramarye wrote >>
True, but that doesn't necessarily justify a 1:1 car ratio.I was responding to the "students don't need cars" statements.
IMO at least a strong minority of students at OSU do not need cars. Around 10,000 live on campus and around 40,000 live off campus. I would venture to guess that at least 20% of students don't need or use cars. Even at that low number, thats still 10,000 people. The people that need cars can live in area's that have plenty of space for cars (ie: 4th and Summit), while we can still let the High Street Corridor densify.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Likes Old Houses wrote >>
johnwirtz wrote >>
Even better idea, charge for the parking separate from the housing and see how many people still want it.Charging for parking will just push more cars to on street parking, which the area can't support.
Okay, charge a fee for on-street parking comparable to or more than the market price of off-street parking.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Columbus already does, they charge for parking stickers to park in the area. Don't have one, get ticketed or towed.
johnwirtz wrote >>
Likes Old Houses wrote >>
johnwirtz wrote >>
Even better idea, charge for the parking separate from the housing and see how many people still want it.Charging for parking will just push more cars to on street parking, which the area can't support.
Okay, charge a fee for on-street parking comparable to or more than the market price of off-street parking.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think you should include the entire campus area in your numbers. Not just OSU property itself.
The figures are probably closer to 25,000 - 30,000 people.
joshlapp wrote >>
Cookie wrote >>
gramarye wrote >>
True, but that doesn't necessarily justify a 1:1 car ratio.I was responding to the "students don't need cars" statements.
IMO at least a strong minority of students at OSU do not need cars. Around 10,000 live on campus and around 40,000 live off campus. I would venture to guess that at least 20% of students don't need or use cars. Even at that low number, thats still 10,000 people. The people that need cars can live in area's that have plenty of space for cars (ie: 4th and Summit), while we can still let the High Street Corridor densify.
Posted 2 years ago # -
joshlapp wrote >>
The people that need cars can live in areas that have plenty of space for cars (ie: 4th and Summit), while we can still let the High Street Corridor densify.4th and Summit only look like they have "plenty of space for cars" because about 25% of the residential units in Weinland Park are vacant AND because right now, you can't park on the relevant one-way (Summit in the morning and 4th in the afternoon) during rush hour. Hopefully both of those things will change over the next few years. Certainly we're trying, anyway.
Posted 2 years ago # -
While I agree the UD is very walkable, I NEEDED my car during my college years. Especially for an internship for a construction company which required me to go to different jobsites. Also, there isn't a construction company that are walkable from UD.
I worked full-time while going to school full-time. I've rode the COTA during my college years, maybe 3 times. I used it twice to go to work in City Center and was late to work both times.
I use COTA more frequently now but I won't use it when I know I have to be somewhere by certain time.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It's pretty chicken-eggy. I'm not sure if the parking situation becomes really bad that people clamor for public transportation (which would be my wish). It certainly hasn't worked in the Short North. And I really don't think that the bus is going to cut it for a college student from outside of Columbus. IMHO it's a cultural issue for small to mid-sized town and suburban dwelling Midwesterners. They'll push their car to the destination before they take the bus. Now a streetcar might be a different animal.
As for Long's I thought that was going to be student housing according the latest OSU master plan.
@cc I think students are a bigger disaster than Section 8 housing in Weinland Park. The typical Section 8 single mother is quieter than 8 drunk colleges dudes at 3:00 A.M.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Just the opposite is true based on surveys. College students are more likely to try new things more so than your typical person. The students that come from communities that do not have bus service are more apt to try out it to experience it. It doesn't cost them anything.
Where are you getting your bogus information ?
rory wrote >>
And I really don't think that the bus is going to cut it for a college student from outside of Columbus. IMHO it's a cultural issue for small to mid-sized town and suburban dwelling Midwesterners. They'll push their car to the destination before they take the bus. Now a streetcar might be a different animal.Posted 2 years ago # -
rory wrote <a
@cc I think students are a bigger disaster than Section 8 housing in Weinland Park. The typical Section 8 single mother is quieter than 8 drunk colleges dudes at 3:00 A.M.+1
Posted 2 years ago # -
The ideas of growth are always nice. I love the cranes. I love the idea of building up the city but it has to be within reason and also mesh with the area. We all love the idea of new buildings. A concern would be how the rest of campus grows. The large companies can hold their own. But some smaller groups and individuals will lose potential residents due to the trickle down that we could see. That means rent will drop along the outside and possibly see more section 8 near the weinland park and remainder of the far side of campus.
I do love the idea that the run down buildings will be forced to step it up. But I think the owners allowed them to get that way for a reason and they will remain dumps.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Antonio wrote >>
Just the opposite is true based on surveys. College students are more likely to try new things more so than your typical person. The students that come from communities that do not have bus service are more apt to try out it to experience it. It doesn't cost them anything.
Where are you getting your bogus information ?rory wrote >>
And I really don't think that the bus is going to cut it for a college student from outside of Columbus. IMHO it's a cultural issue for small to mid-sized town and suburban dwelling Midwesterners. They'll push their car to the destination before they take the bus. Now a streetcar might be a different animal.
It was my opinion! ;)
Posted 2 years ago # -
labi wrote >>
joshlapp wrote >>
The people that need cars can live in areas that have plenty of space for cars (ie: 4th and Summit), while we can still let the High Street Corridor densify.4th and Summit only look like they have "plenty of space for cars" because about 25% of the residential units in Weinland Park are vacant AND because right now, you can't park on the relevant one-way (Summit in the morning and 4th in the afternoon) during rush hour. Hopefully both of those things will change over the next few years. Certainly we're trying, anyway.
I live on 4th on North Campus, and I can certainly say that there is plenty of space for my car and many more if need be. The generic 1:1 ratio for parking actually gives students less options by requiring the price of parking to be built in to all units in the neighborhood.
Although today I do need my car to make my daily commute, in the future if I don't need it I would like to be given the option to live in a dense neighborhood that doesn't have to accomdate everyones car. If the market calls for more density and less cars (I assume that Edwards would not try to build if the market didn't call for it), then perhaps we should give it a chance.
Posted 2 years ago #
You must log in to post.





Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.