Proposed Campus Development

[Cookie]

cc wrote >>
I have to agree that a car is a ‘want’ rather than a ‘need’ for an OSU student living in the UD.

What if they have an off-campus job that isn’t on the busline or ends when the bus isn’t running or just takes too long to get to by bus?

[Walker Evans]

berdawn wrote >>
I have to disagree with you.

I don’t know if we’re really disagreeing. More of just going circular with this. You say students have cars because they don’t have experience with public transit (which is true to some extent), but I’d also say that they don’t have experience with public transit because zoning laws have made parking easier than using transit (and developing better transit systems).

FWIW, this isn’t a problem unique to the University District. “Minimum Parking Requirement” type laws exist in places all over the world. And it creates a car-dependent culture. Which I think is the opposite of what is appropriate for an area like the University District.

[Walker Evans]

Cookie wrote >>
What if they have an off-campus job that isn’t on the busline or ends when the bus isn’t running or just takes too long to get to by bus?

Sounds like a job they applied for while already *having* a car. So it’s a necessity out of their own invention.

[cc]

dp

[cc]

Cookie wrote >>

cc wrote >>
I have to agree that a car is a ‘want’ rather than a ‘need’ for an OSU student living in the UD.

What if they have an off-campus job that isn’t on the busline or ends when the bus isn’t running or just takes too long to get to by bus?

I guess it would depend on how they prioritize the job. Having gone through undergrad without a car I can say there are plenty of jobs that are ideal for students that meet the carless criteria. Of course there are aways exceptions. The vast majority of student cars sit for long periods of time.

[johnwirtz]

Maybe a couple of car-sharing spaces could reduce the demand for parking spaces in the building:
http://tp.osu.edu/carsharing/

Even better idea, charge for the parking separate from the housing and see how many people still want it.

[Cookie]

Walker wrote >>

Cookie wrote >>
What if they have an off-campus job that isn’t on the busline or ends when the bus isn’t running or just takes too long to get to by bus?

Sounds like a job they applied for while already *having* a car. So it’s a necessity out of their own invention.

Wow. I honestly don’t know how to respond to that.

[labi]

I’m curious to see how a new building with less parking will compete with older buildings with more parking, rent-wise. I would guess that many undergrads do come to school with a car (because if they live in their hometowns at all, they need one) and having a “free” place to park it would be an advantage. Availability of off-street parking is something that every rental ad mentions.

On the other hand, maybe OSU’s incipient on-campus living requirement for freshmen and sophomores could wean them off cars by the time they are allowed to live off campus?

[Walker Evans]

Cookie wrote >>

Walker wrote >>

Cookie wrote >>
What if they have an off-campus job that isn’t on the busline or ends when the bus isn’t running or just takes too long to get to by bus?

Sounds like a job they applied for while already *having* a car. So it’s a necessity out of their own invention.

Wow. I honestly don’t know how to respond to that.

What’s the problem?

I’m saying that if you already own a car, and you apply for a job that you can only reach by car, then you create a need: your car is necessary to get to your job.

But if you’re a student on campus that doesn’t already have a car, you’re probably not going to apply and get a job that is located somewhere only reachable by car.

A car isn’t an inherent need for everyone.

[labi]

johnwirtz wrote >>
Even better idea, charge for the parking separate from the housing and see how many people still want it.

Really interesting to think about how this would play out if it were done district-wide.

[Likes Old Houses]

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.

I lived in the UD for 2+ years and yes I needed my car atleast 5 days a week. I worked in Grove City, Hebron and Worthington in my time on campus, and not having a car was not an option.

The proposed development is pretty standard practice for developers. Ask for everything and more that you want, and then negotiate the scale back a little bit and still make a ton of money.

[cc]

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.

[Cookie]

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.

[surber17]

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 parking”. 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.

[gramarye]

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.

[Author]

Posts