RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
On Tuesday, Capital South will be presenting a revised plan for the Columbus Commons development at the former City Center site to the Downtown Commission. The new plans provide more detail on what the nine-acre greenspace will look like, which includes a space for outdoor music and other performances.
The demolition of the empty City Center mall may happen as soon as late September. The park is scheduled to be completed in the Fall of 2010 and planted and finished in the Spring of 2011. Additional discussion can be found here.
Below are several new renderings of the park space:
The long term plans still include the gradual addition of private development to fill in some of the greenspace with multi-story buildings that will contain a mix of residences, street-level retail, offices, and entertainment destinations. Current estimates say that the area will be home to an additional 435,000 sq ft of office space, 70,000 sqft of retail space and 400 new residential units. The parking garage will remain to the south of the project, and underground parking will be preserved below the park.
Below is a site plan for the long term development plans for the area. Click to enlarge:
gk Says: I think we should take additional MONEY to do something bold for once in this town.
Fixed that for ya. Spoken like a true supporter of the income tax increase. ;)
As I understand it, Columbus Commons is seeking private developers. Too bad Nationwide chose Grandview Yard over Columbus Commons. And anyhow how much can it cost to throw some grass seed down these days?
Walker, this park has nothing to do with the city income tax and everything to do with sparing city officials embarrassment by their lack of a conversion plan and investors. I still remember the hastily arranged press conference when the keys to city center were turned over to the city and bold promises were made to the citizens of Columbus. However, I don’t ever expect you to deal with the facts of any given situation, as exemplified by a number of your posts. Remember this one:
“Bear, you’re forgetting Walker’s favorite way to present an argument: Misrepresenting data to support whatever point he’s trying to make. Then backpedaling afterwards if he gets called out on it. Just wait for the second part, it’s coming in T-minus 3…”
Thoughts on some of the previous comments:
A fountain? That can be used 6 months out of the year? Fountains are very expensive to design, build and keep running. On a limited budget, I have a feeling the developers will want more bang for their buck than something that will be used only half the year.
Square boxes for the building sites? This is probably a notation of where the land parcels are, not what the design of a future building will look like.
No grand entrance from High St? Why spend money to plant trees or install an expansive walkway when the plan is to develop the space into store front buildings in a few years. Again, I bet it’s a budgetary concern, not a snub to High St.
MSI did the initial conceptual renderings, but it looks like they’re out of the picture now. According to the Aug. 20 Dispatch article, the project has been awarded to a “Moody Nolan design team†including construction-Corna/Kokosing, architects-Moody Nolan and landscape architects-the EDGE Group. New York based Georgetown Company is the developer.
Also the DowntownColumbus.com website has recently updated the Columbus Commons section with some FAQ. http://www.downtowncolumbus.com/progress/columbus-commons
gk Says: I don’t ever expect you to deal with the facts of any given situation…
Trying to use a quote from a friend of mine who was busting my chops to attack my character is a pretty weak way to go about framing your argument in a more positive light.
Anyway, if you’re trying to state your case based on facts I would love to hear how you plan to fund your imaginary proposal for something “bolder”.
Apparently, gk hit a nerve. Your pettiness is very unbecoming, Walker. Grow up, and take it like a man.
What exactly did I say that was petty?
If you’re just looking to sling insults, you can take it somewhere else.
Commission OK’s tearing down City Center
Tuesday, August 25, 2009 10:48 AM
BY MARLA MATZER ROSE
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Columbus’ Downtown Commission unanimously approved the demolition of the Columbus City Center mall at its meeting this morning.
The move clears the way for a permit to be issued to Capitol South Community Urban Redevelopment Corp., with demolition planned to begin in late September or early October.
READ MORE
Columbus tends to settle for anything in its quest either to catch up with other cities or feed its hunger for instant gratification. Perhaps taking some time to find a private developer with deep pockets that is interested in investing in downtown Columbus may provide a better product in the end.
It’s always easy to spend someone else’s money…
Is there not an amphitheater being built at the new bicentennial park? Why are we planning one here? Closing High st off as a large open entrance is a mistake. High St needs more variation along its corridor. Give us some setback or larger openings along High….bring the park up to the edge.
I think having the seating under the tree canopy space on Rich is nice but it needs to wrap around the corner and be on High as well. It would help bring in that lunch hour crowd, help with connections, and give schmoozing an opportunity. It’s almost as if we have created a wall to keep people out. I don’t want to sit there and stare at a parking garage or people standing in the park. I want to watch action up and down High St.
From the renderings it just doesn’t seem very inviting.
Opening Town St up and having retail/commercial/office on the south side of the theatre would be brilliant and allow for plenty of park space between town and rich streets. Basically, I think buildings along High will not give a very open feeling to the central park space.
I hope these flower beds are planning on being native plants as it would be a shame to irrigate non-native flowers….kind of goes against Columbus’ green initiatives doesn’t it?
Let’s not allow this new design come to fruition or we have just paid a lot of people to transplant Bryant Park to downtown Columbus.
Plan view design standpoint = fail. Too mant right angles and sharp edges with very little blending. Very rigid and even though it fits in with the “standard” city grid I think we would benefit from more mixing of space.
ja Says: Perhaps taking some time to find a private developer with deep pockets that is interested in investing in downtown Columbus may provide a better product in the end.
Isn’t that exactly what they’re doing?
@ No T
+1 to everything you said
@No T – I see where you are coming from and agree, but I think we can have buildings on High and still get a grand entrance to the park. The buildings haven’t been designed yet, but my thoughts are; have the retail/restaurant space stretch from the High St. part of the building to the park. So basically there would be 2 entrances to each store. This would also allow for an end unit (possibly restaurant) to wrap around the building and provide an amazing patio dining experience.
I also agree that I do not want to see the basic square shape, so hopefully some design aspects can be thrown in, but this will be up to the private developer.
I also think they said that Town St. can’t support buildings on top of it, which (if I’m right) kind of kills that idea (although a good one).
@ja and gk – please give examples of how Columbus feeds its instant gratification? Also how has Walker not dealt with the facts? I came to this board 2 years ago because it was the only one giving the actual facts and using them to support viewpoints. I can’t even think of one time where Walker expressed an opinion without backing it up with some facts. I don’t see anything from either of you. How many Nationwide’s do you think are out there? Also, don’t you think most are trying to save their company in the recession rather than take on new multi-million dollar projects? Nationwide made a smart business decision to go with GY and it’s the same decision I would have made. Also, I don’t see it as a negative effect on the city; I see it as extending the downtown area (its around 1 mile away).
The Columbus Common’s plan wasn’t just thrown together. If you did any reading on the subject at all, before bashing Walker, you would have seen this. On this blog alone there was an interview posted that went over the process and this was the best decision out there. The city is creating a blank slate for developers and I think it’s the right move. In the mean time, instead of looking at an empty mall, or a dirt pile, its creating a park that will not only attract more people to downtown, but it will also attract that private money you’re looking for. So unless you own a company that is looking to drop $100 million dollars, please back up statements with facts.
I can’t imagine with Moody Nolan’s stellar reputation that they would design a monstrosity of a park like this. They have more imagination than that……..I hope.
#34
surber17 Says:
August 26th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
“Also, I don’t see it as a negative effect on the city; I see it as extending the downtown area (its around 1 mile away).”
One of the biggest problems that has been identified by city officials as well as consultants for decades is that our downtown is geographically too spread out and therefore lacks a big city feel or any synergy typically found in other cities. There is a tremendous amount of in-fill required which, in and of itself, will take decades. It has developed like most suburbs, with continual sprawl. Extending our notion of downtown Columbus to include the inner ring suburb of Grandview (Grandview Yard, that is) is simply ludicrous. I say stop the sprawl and begin filling in all the empty spaces that already exist in our downtown to create more synergy and big city feel.
I totally agree with what you are saying and I really want to see places fill in too, but I really don’t see GY as sprawl. I rode my bike from GY to the Scioto Mile in about 3 min – 5 min. It takes me that long to ride from one side of downtown to the other. I don’t think people look at Short North, German Village, or Campus as sprawl …. they all are about the same difference away from downtown. I’m not saying all of Grandview should be looked at in this way. I am saying that with some infrastructure changes (make it more pedestrian friendly) I think you will see that GY is closer than you think and could enhance the downtown experience. But maybe you disagree and don’t look at Urban Neighborhoods as part of downtown and that’s ok, but I will say I know plenty of people who want to live as close to downtown as possible without being in the center of the city and that is how I see it as fighting sprawl instead of creating more.
I agree that this plan looks quite bland and almost OCD- there’s a tight block of trees in one place, and then almost no trees in the rest of the park… and it’s really square and plain.
About the stage: it points due West. Imagine being a performer on that stage around sunset… I hope they do sunlight studies because I don’t think there’s a building close enough to shade the stage. Bicentennial faces due North, COSI(Genoa Park) faces west but is low and has a building just west of it.
I know people like to sit on the grass for concerts, but I think more paved area around the stage would make that area more multipurpose- you could set up tables for fundraiser events or receptions, or even better… have dancing events! Tango, swing, salsa… wouldn’t it be fun to have free dance lessons right after work and then dance to a live band?
@jazzypants
Only if it were like that parade scene in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. I would participate in that daily.
and as for competing with Bicentennial- if they make this Commons park stage area more multi-purpose, then it has the advantage of being easier to get to (parking and bus) and surrounded by businesses (you could have lunchtime events that people can easily walk to). Bicentennial is really about BIG events and this could be for smaller, more frequent events that are of greater variety. You can do a lot more than just concerts with a smaller, shorter, convertible stage.