Our City Online

Messageboard - Development

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard.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

Jeffrey Park - News & Updates

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Development Jeffrey Park – News & Updates

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 226 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1102496
    Josh Bauman
    Josh Bauman
    Participant

    .The lofts have also have 3 retail spots with 4,500 sq ft. Everything else is owned by Wagenbrenner.

    I’m curious if Wagenbrenner will start next with the houses between Auden and Neruda or if they’ll flip to building out the larger T-shaped apartment building.

    I hope all of this action finally activates that retail and that little green space behind the lofts becomes more than a dog restroom. That’s such a great little neighborhood hideaway.

    Hopefully the T-shaped building gets underway soon — it’ll be a big anchor for the site. But depending on the market maybe the single-family are in higher demand at the moment?

    #1102534
    Gus W
    Gus W
    Participant

    So where exactly are the 3 retail spots supposed to be? The map is kind of hard to make out.

    #1102541
    Josh Bauman
    Josh Bauman
    Participant

    So where exactly are the 3 retail spots supposed to be? The map is kind of hard to make out.

    They’re on the back side of the Lofts building facing the green space (see below)

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #1102543
    Gus W
    Gus W
    Participant

    Those are the lofts that have been there for years, correct? I didn’t realize they had retail space on the bottom. Was that always the plan for them? It looks like they’re called the Vetro Lofts now. http://www.vetrolofts.com/

    #1102565
    Josh Bauman
    Josh Bauman
    Participant

    Those are the lofts that have been there for years, correct? I didn’t realize they had retail space on the bottom. Was that always the plan for them? It looks like they’re called the Vetro Lofts now. http://www.vetrolofts.com/

    They don’t call much attention to the storefronts, but they were built for retail.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #1102567
    Josh Bauman
    Josh Bauman
    Participant

    Those are the lofts that have been there for years, correct? I didn’t realize they had retail space on the bottom. Was that always the plan for them? It looks like they’re called the Vetro Lofts now. http://www.vetrolofts.com/

    It actually looks like they converted the spaces to 1-bedrooms according to this floorplan (which seems to be recent considering they have the footprint of the new construction included)

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #1102808
    Ned23
    Ned23
    Participant

    Much different than the original proposal. A lot more lower-priced apartments packed in.

    #1102823
    King Gambrinus
    King Gambrinus
    Participant

    It actually looks like they converted the spaces to 1-bedrooms according to this floorplan (which seems to be recent considering they have the fxootprint of the new construction included)

    Interesting. It’ll be nice to see that little green patch actually landscaped like that picture also shows.

    #1102874
    Ned23
    Ned23
    Participant

    Didn’t one of the the original plans called for larger detached houses and a boulevard strip in one area? that seems to be gone. Or I could be misremembering.

    #1102893

    WJT
    Participant

    Much different than the original proposal. A lot more lower-priced apartments packed in.

    There is a huge need for lower priced apartments. I would much rather have single family housing mixed in to existing neighborhoods near downtown (like King/Lincoln). A big blank site like this should provide more density(and more diversity like more retail). JMHO

    #1102910
    Gus W
    Gus W
    Participant

    It’d be really nice to have some kind of small market or shop around here.

    #1102938
    Ned23
    Ned23
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div>
    Much different than the original proposal. A lot more lower-priced apartments packed in.

    There is a huge need for lower priced apartments. I would much rather have single family housing mixed in to existing neighborhoods near downtown (like King/Lincoln). A big blank site like this should provide more density(and more diversity like more retail). JMHO

    I definitely agree that more lower-priced housing is needed, but at the same time developments that rely entirely on transient & rental populations tend to deteriorate quickly. Without the invested interests of permanent residents the developers just extract as much profit as they can after recouping their investments, they reinvest very little, and then sell the degraded properties to secondary management companies and move on to the next new thing. At least that is the pattern I’ve observed in one area after another. Morse Rd., Bethel Rd., and Sancus Blvd. are some recent examples I’ve witnessed.

    #1102948

    WJT
    Participant

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

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div><br>
    Much different than the original proposal. A lot more lower-priced apartments packed in.

    There is a huge need for lower priced apartments. I would much rather have single family housing mixed in to existing neighborhoods near downtown (like King/Lincoln). A big blank site like this should provide more density(and more diversity like more retail). JMHO

    I definitely agree that more lower-priced housing is needed, but at the same time developments that rely entirely on transient & rental populations tend to deteriorate quickly. Without the invested interests of permanent residents the developers just extract as much profit as they can after recouping their investments, they reinvest very little, and then sell the degraded properties to secondary management companies and move on to the next new thing. At least that is the pattern I’ve observed in one area after another. Morse Rd., Bethel Rd., and Sancus Blvd. are some recent examples I’ve witnessed.

    Many of the projects going up now or proposed are being built to condo specifications. If those eventually go condo, that might help the ownership side of things. Also there is room to mix in rowhouse condos like Neighborhood Launch has.

    If you do not build market rate housing downtown, it is simply going to be a wealthy/upper middle class neighborhood. Is that what we really want? Another exclusive neighborhood where only the rich reside and the rest are just workers or visitors?

    Plus many of those areas you listed are a part of much larger areas that have undergone neighborhood transitions that are of a much large scale than the individual complexes.

    Do you think that the projects built or proposed now that are rental(HighPointe, The LC proposals, the Neilston and the Normandy, will deteriorate? Or will the mix of uses and the increasing vibrancy of downtown(along with condo conversions) keep this from happening?

    #1102950
    Ned23
    Ned23
    Participant

    Many of the projects going up now or proposed are being built to condo specifications. If those eventually go condo, that might help the ownership side of things. Also there is room to mix in rowhouse condos like Neighborhood Launch has.

    If you do not build market rate housing downtown, it is simply going to be a wealthy/upper middle class neighborhood. Is that what we really want? Another exclusive neighborhood where only the rich reside and the rest are just workers or visitors?

    Plus many of those areas you listed are a part of much larger areas that have undergone neighborhood transitions that are of a much large scale than the individual complexes.

    Do you think that the projects built or proposed now that are rental(HighPointe, The LC proposals, the Neilston and the Normandy, will deteriorate? Or will the mix of uses and the increasing vibrancy of downtown(along with condo conversions) keep this from happening?

    Of course we don’t want exclusive upper-class neighborhoods, we want a mix of permanent and transient residents. We want the low cost apartments mixed in with the single-family homes, along connector streets, for example. The permanent residents can exert pressure on the property managers to keep up standards. That’s in an ideal world, which of course doesn’t exist, but it should still be a goal to work toward, don’t you think?

    In response to your second question, I could see some of those projects you mentioned deteriorating. I witnessed it growing up in Cleveland. High Point-like projects that deteriorated and became Section 8 housing. I can take you to some of those places.

    #1102952

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>WJT wrote:</div>
    Many of the projects going up now or proposed are being built to condo specifications. If those eventually go condo, that might help the ownership side of things. Also there is room to mix in rowhouse condos like Neighborhood Launch has.

    If you do not build market rate housing downtown, it is simply going to be a wealthy/upper middle class neighborhood. Is that what we really want? Another exclusive neighborhood where only the rich reside and the rest are just workers or visitors?

    Plus many of those areas you listed are a part of much larger areas that have undergone neighborhood transitions that are of a much large scale than the individual complexes.

    Do you think that the projects built or proposed now that are rental(HighPointe, The LC proposals, the Neilston and the Normandy, will deteriorate? Or will the mix of uses and the increasing vibrancy of downtown(along with condo conversions) keep this from happening?

    Of course we don’t want exclusive upper-class neighborhoods, we want a mix of permanent and transient residents. We want the low cost apartments mixed in with the single-family homes, along connector streets, for example. The permanent residents can exert pressure on the property managers to keep up standards. That’s in an ideal world, which of course doesn’t exist, but it should still be a goal to work toward, don’t you think?

    In response to your second question, I could see some of those projects you mentioned deteriorating. I witnessed it growing up in Cleveland. High Point-like projects that deteriorated and became Section 8 housing. I can take you to some of those places.

    I very much agree with the first paragraph.

    But regarding the second, we are living in totally different times than when you and I grew up. If there is any deteriorated housing left in downtown Cleveland (not rundown adjacent neighborhoods), it must certainly be targeted for either demolition and replacement or upgrading to satisfy the gentrifiers. Also maybe we should use the word ‘proposals’ rather than ‘projects’..as that word evokes images of Pruitt-Igoe, etc. and I don’t think that is what we are talking about.

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 226 total)

The forum ‘Development’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: