Our City Online

Messageboard - General Columbus Discussion

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

New Vets Memorial Planned for Scioto Peninsula

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion New Vets Memorial Planned for Scioto Peninsula

This topic contains 282 replies, has 68 voices, and was last updated by Walker Evans Walker Evans 4 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 283 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1008829

    NDaEast
    Participant

    The idea that all people want to consume a zoo experience the same way is narrowminded.

    Then they should pay for it themselves — they need a zoo in South Linden, too … and Hamilton Road, Morse Road, and Brice Road are all looking kind of sparse and could use $65,000,000 in taxpayer-funded entertainment.

    We have been extraordinarily generous in providing a top notch zoo in Delaware County. We don’t need to provide another taxpayer funded Zoo for the enjoyment of some who would rather go see monkeys than go to a movie, or bowling alley, or restaurant, or COSI, or opera, or the museum, or ice rink, or play, or shopping trip … taking money out of an entrepreneur’s pocket to help pay $300,000 Zoo salaries.

    #1008846

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CB_downtowner wrote:</div>
    I’m sure lots may not want to make the drive, but would love to COGO bike it, take a bus, or pop by during their walk on the Scioto.

    Given the very low numbers, percentage wise, of alternative transportation utilization to cars I really doubt there is any significant number of people who are so intimidated by driving but enamoured with animals that a downtown zoo is their only option.

    As to enjoying a zoo, I don’t speculate on that. I don’t enjoy them.

    Oh yeah? Is that based on data you measured?

    #1008847

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CB_downtowner wrote:</div>
    The idea that all people want to consume a zoo experience the same way is narrowminded.

    Then they should pay for it themselves — they need a zoo in South Linden, too … and Hamilton Road, Morse Road, and Brice Road are all looking kind of sparse and could use $65,000,000 in taxpayer-funded entertainment.

    We have been extraordinarily generous in providing a top notch zoo in Delaware County. We don’t need to provide another taxpayer funded Zoo for the enjoyment of some who would rather go see monkeys than go to a movie, or bowling alley, or restaurant, or COSI, or opera, or the museum, or ice rink, or play, or shopping trip … taking money out of an entrepreneur’s pocket to help pay $300,000 Zoo salaries.

    So you think a mini-zoo on South Linden would generate even close to the foot traffic as if you built it downtown?

    #1008958

    MRipley
    Participant

    So you think a mini-zoo on South Linden would generate even close to the foot traffic as if you built it downtown?

    With all the families living in the area, it would probably see higher attendance figures (read: there are likely more kids that enjoy a day with monkeys and tree slides than hipsters & young urban professionals).

    Plus, those residents would actually contribute their tax to a mini-zoo vs the tax-abated downtown condo owners who by your own words will most benefit from potential property value increases

    #1008960
    jgeorge300
    jgeorge300
    Participant

    This is interesting to me as I don’t have knowledge of the different county benefits. What does Franklin county get that Delaware county does not other than some very small attendance occasional benefits? Workers can live anywhere, taxes on sales are collected in Delaware, any businesses nearby are in Delaware, property taxes are in Delaware. What am I missing?

    I’m still looking for my documentation with a fuller list. But I know all Franklin county schoolkids receive a huge discount for school trips to the zoo. For the Zoo Kids program (for high school students), non-Franklin county students have to pay tuition whereas the levy covers the tuition for Franklin county students. I believe allot of the out reach programs are heavily discounted as well. Some of the programs can be found in the 2013 Columbus Zoo Cares document

    #1008981

    joev
    Participant

    If they add a dead horse beating exhibit, I think at least a few of you will buy memberships.

    #1008982

    geoyui
    Participant

    Not sure if this has been posted, but last night nbc4i reported that 91% of this levy goes to maintaining and improving the current zoo in Delaware. 9% is for the downtown mini zoo.

    At 9%, it sounds like the zoo downtown will happen regardless of the outcome. Maybe it will be scaled down, who knows. I want the zoo downtown and I think it is a wonderful attraction for Columbus, but this levy to me feels like they are taking advantage of all the support the taxpayers have provided over the many decades.

    #1008985
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Not sure if this has been posted, but last night nbc4i reported that 91% of this levy goes to maintaining and improving the current zoo in Delaware. 9% is for the downtown mini zoo.

    At 9%, it sounds like the zoo downtown will happen regardless of the outcome. Maybe it will be scaled down, who knows. I want the zoo downtown and I think it is a wonderful attraction for Columbus, but this levy to me feels like they are taking advantage of all the support the taxpayers have provided over the many decades.

    Everything I’ve read on that agrees with you; with or without this levy there will be something built downtown.

    Also, you say “taking advantage” others say “over reach”. Same idea.

    #1008986
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CB_downtowner wrote:</div>
    So you think a mini-zoo on South Linden would generate even close to the foot traffic as if you built it downtown?

    With all the families living in the area, it would probably see higher attendance figures (read: there are likely more kids that enjoy a day with monkeys and tree slides than hipsters & young urban professionals).

    Plus, those residents would actually contribute their tax to a mini-zoo vs the tax-abated downtown condo owners who by your own words will most benefit from potential property value increases

    Good point.

    Since when is it about “foot traffic” rather than “visitors”? We should only care about visitors to a publicly funded venue if they don’t drive?

    #1008988

    joev
    Participant

    Do you really need a primer on what the term foot traffic means and why it’s not the weird anti-car thing you seem to thing everything is?

    #1009003

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>
    If the idea of cannibalization was true, why would it even matter who funded the venues?

    As far as pure competition between private entities, it doesn’t. However, if a taxpayer funded development shifts entertainment dollars from existing venues in the name of area development there’s a good argument that it’s not an effective use of taxpayer funds.

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>
    the extent of spending remains perpetually static and limited.

    You can’t really believe there is no limit to consumer entertainment spending.

    That doesn’t change that Columbus would have to neither build through public dollars or support through policy any further business, beyond any entertainment value. Any type runs the risk of cannibalization if what you’re saying is true, so how could the city support any business expansion that would just hurt what already exists?

    Limits with individuals, sure, but we are talking about a citywide or regional draw, both of which continue to add more population and a larger economic pool.

    #1009005
    Caleb
    Caleb
    Participant

    Well. Hmm. I don’t know where to stand on this.

    #1009007
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Limits with individuals, sure, but we are talking about a citywide or regional draw, both of which continue to add more population and a larger economic pool.

    What is a region, in this sense, but a collection of individuals? You’re talking about adding more people to the same area, which is valid, but you must recognize not all patrons to a new venue come from outside the area.

    There is a shifting of patrons within an area; otherwise, no restaurants ( for instance ) would ever close for lack of business.

    #1009039

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CB_downtowner wrote:</div>
    So you think a mini-zoo on South Linden would generate even close to the foot traffic as if you built it downtown?

    With all the families living in the area, it would probably see higher attendance figures (read: there are likely more kids that enjoy a day with monkeys and tree slides than hipsters & young urban professionals).

    Plus, those residents would actually contribute their tax to a mini-zoo vs the tax-abated downtown condo owners who by your own words will most benefit from potential property value increases

    The problem is that a lot of what you’re pointing to has a lot more overlap with the current zoo. A downtown presence would probably appeal to a lot of the same families as a South Linden zoo, but also pull in a demographic that is probably under-represented at their main zoo. More importantly, the appeal of a downtown zoo isn’t just about getting visitors to sustain itself. It’s also about developing the area around it. Because this would be more of an “express” zoo, why not visit the zoo then grab lunch or dinner nearby? Or vice versa.

    South Linden is great. But let’s be real… in terms of attractions, we should be pushing visitors to our downtown core, not outside of it. The faster we can infill, see more people walking the streets, and accelerate retail development, the better we can market Columbus as a great place to live.

    #1009041

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>rus wrote:</div>

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div><br>
    If the idea of cannibalization was true, why would it even matter who funded the venues?

    As far as pure competition between private entities, it doesn’t. However, if a taxpayer funded development shifts entertainment dollars from existing venues in the name of area development there’s a good argument that it’s not an effective use of taxpayer funds.

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div><br>
    the extent of spending remains perpetually static and limited.

    You can’t really believe there is no limit to consumer entertainment spending.

    That doesn’t change that Columbus would have to neither build through public dollars or support through policy any further business, beyond any entertainment value. Any type runs the risk of cannibalization if what you’re saying is true, so how could the city support any business expansion that would just hurt what already exists?

    Limits with individuals, sure, but we are talking about a citywide or regional draw, both of which continue to add more population and a larger economic pool.

    The problem with the cannibalization argument is it doesn’t account nearly enough for out-of-city visitor spend. The more things you have downtown, the more conventions, weddings, random road trips, etc… that will make their way here. And just because visitors come here, doesn’t mean they will spend in Ohio. A zoo, for example, might give a business traveler visiting Nationwide a reason to get out of his hotel room and visit some Columbus sites. That, and it doesn’t factor in that Columbus continues to add new residents, which creates need for more attractions, and that a strong downtown core could encourage businesses to invest here and draw in new residents who have spending power.

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 283 total)

The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.