390 S. Washington Avenue

This topic has 15 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by Gus W.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)

1 2 →

Author
Posts
February 26, 2016 2:43 pm at 2:43 pm #1115967

jbcmh81
Participant
I noticed in the February 23rd Downtown Commission Agenda that the old row house building at this address has been proposed for demolition for a parking lot. Anyone know what the reception for this proposal was? I hope it was rejected.
February 26, 2016 2:50 pm at 2:50 pm #1115968

Eugene_C
Participant
I wasn’t even aware of it. I suppose there are worse locations for parking, this is pretty far off the path. It may, at least, temporarily allow some other parking lot closer to the city center to be developed.
February 26, 2016 3:03 pm at 3:03 pm #1115969

jbcmh81
Participant
Eugene_C wrote:
I wasn’t even aware of it. I suppose there are worse locations for parking, this is pretty far off the path. It may, at least, temporarily allow some other parking lot closer to the city center to be developed.
I thought Downtown standards now pretty strongly discouraged demolition for parking lots without a redevelopment plan? The building in question looks solid, and it would be historic in nature, so despite maybe a less than ideal location, I would much rather see it reused.
Here it is: https://goo.gl/maps/YZjRj3HCGM12
February 26, 2016 4:42 pm at 4:42 pm #1115985

Eridony
Participant
Not the prettiest building, but so much better than another parking lot. I hope the idea to demolish it is rejected.
February 26, 2016 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #1116008

lbl
Participant
listed owner is RONK BROTHERS PROPERTIES.
they own 16 parcels which includes nearly all of the lots running between Mound & Engler from Washington.
February 26, 2016 7:47 pm at 7:47 pm #1116012

Ned23
Participant
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
February 26, 2016 8:26 pm at 8:26 pm #1116014

jbcmh81
Participant
Ned23 wrote:
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
It can’t be any worse than the condos in IV that face 670. With a little renovation and some good windows, I doubt you’d have trouble finding renters, even if the location is not in the middle of Downtown. A parking lot makes no sense here, as there is nothing around it that the parking would even serve.
February 27, 2016 12:36 am at 12:36 am #1116023

ohbr
Participant
Ned23 wrote:
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
Didn’t stop the Miranova from building along 70/71 or the Brewery District apartments.
I’m just carious to see the end game. I don’t think these have been rented in awhile any. If They were structurally sound and in decent condition, you’d think they would have been renting them already.
February 27, 2016 10:15 am at 10:15 am #1116035

jbcmh81
Participant
ohbr wrote:
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div>
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
Didn’t stop the Miranova from building along 70/71 or the Brewery District apartments.
I’m just carious to see the end game. I don’t think these have been rented in awhile any. If They were structurally sound and in decent condition, you’d think they would have been renting them already.
Unless the owner was just sitting on it.
February 27, 2016 11:09 am at 11:09 am #1116042

dalias
Participant
jbcmh81 wrote:
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div>
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
It can’t be any worse than the condos in IV that face 670. With a little renovation and some good windows, I doubt you’d have trouble finding renters, even if the location is not in the middle of Downtown. A parking lot makes no sense here, as there is nothing around it that the parking would even serve.
If you’re discussing the current building that is not the best comparison. The IV new builds incorporated extensive sound reduction in the construction. Even given that, they have not been an easy sell in an area where property has been moving quickly.
February 27, 2016 11:24 am at 11:24 am #1116043

jbcmh81
Participant
dalias wrote:
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div><br>
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
It can’t be any worse than the condos in IV that face 670. With a little renovation and some good windows, I doubt you’d have trouble finding renters, even if the location is not in the middle of Downtown. A parking lot makes no sense here, as there is nothing around it that the parking would even serve.
If you’re discussing the current building that is not the best comparison. The IV new builds incorporated extensive sound reduction in the construction. Even given that, they have not been an easy sell in an area where property has been moving quickly.
I seem to remember an article about them selling pretty quickly after construction. Were they put back on the market? In the case of 390 Washington, the lot is not quite as close to the highway as the condos are, so I think it would be a bit more manageable. And as someone else mentioned, it doesn’t have to be residential, anyway.
February 27, 2016 5:08 pm at 5:08 pm #1116070

WJT
Participant
This is not a bad looking building at all. Do they really need more surface parking there? And this is not any closer to the freeway than the multilevel apartment building(Commons at Grant?)a little farther west. The city could not even get involved and maybe help turn this into some lower income or ‘workforce’ housing?
February 27, 2016 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm #1116077

King Gambrinus
Participant
What condos is everyone talking about? The 2 tiny houses on Russel?
February 27, 2016 8:09 pm at 8:09 pm #1116087

dalias
Participant
jbcmh81 wrote:
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>dalias wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div><br><br>
Kind of a noisy spot for housing what being half-surrounded by freeway, but it could be a great area for a club or offices.
It can’t be any worse than the condos in IV that face 670. With a little renovation and some good windows, I doubt you’d have trouble finding renters, even if the location is not in the middle of Downtown. A parking lot makes no sense here, as there is nothing around it that the parking would even serve.
If you’re discussing the current building that is not the best comparison. The IV new builds incorporated extensive sound reduction in the construction. Even given that, they have not been an easy sell in an area where property has been moving quickly.
I seem to remember an article about them selling pretty quickly after construction. Were they put back on the market? In the case of 390 Washington, the lot is not quite as close to the highway as the condos are, so I think it would be a bit more manageable. And as someone else mentioned, it doesn’t have to be residential, anyway.
Not sure where you heard that. #1 took a while to find the right owner.
#2 is still for sale – http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/77-E-Russell-St_Columbus_OH_43215_M36139-15474
Probably the reason #3 has yet to be built.
February 28, 2016 1:10 am at 1:10 am #1116112

ohbr
Participant
Wow. I can come up with a number of reasons that hasn’t sold. Mainly, who puts floor to ceiling Windows, with a toilet next to it, ABOVE THE FRONT DOOR?? Sure, you can always add blinds or frost the glass, but still, what the actual hell. You’ll never miss the UPS man again for sitting on the loo.
The kitchen doesn’t have any character (not in that old charm way, but in that anything to define it way). The very sterile style is a style that appeals to fewer people. Petty, but light colored hardwood floors aren’t quite in when it comes to new, high end homes, the fireplace is awful, and there is that random wall scone between the kitchen and living room that doesn’t even look aesthetic.
All the highway facing windows are French doors, because that’s what someone wants to open their doors to (I might be inclined to late at night, but I still don’t think I’d want it to ALL be French doors). The Windows you can open on the north side, you have to bend down to the floor to do so.
And for the rooftop garden patio, a half wall would have been much better than a rail from floorboard up on the downtown side. Something to at least do a little to conceal the highway, even when you’re sitting in a chair.
Just a lot of little things add up to make it a poor design IMO. I really liked these passing by everyday, and would love to live in one, but after seeing the inside, I think I’d pass unless I was just planning on dumping a lot more money into it. Also. Landscaping.
Author
Posts