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NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard.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

The Madisons Building Downtown

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Development The Madisons Building Downtown

This topic contains 137 replies, has 49 voices, and was last updated by Walker Evans Walker Evans 2 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 138 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1025459

    joev
    Participant

    Regardless of the parking issue, the buildings are an embarrassing eyesore, and it’s time that something be done to fix that.

    #1025469

    goldenidea
    Participant

    The façade on the northern building looks very attractive. Both buildings would look nice restored.

    “This is one of the two worst properties in downtown,” says Ricksecker.

    Just curious, anyone know the other worst property Cleve refers to here?

    #1025521

    News
    Participant

    City Takes Action Against Owner Of Several Vacant Downtown Buildings Amid Safety Concerns
    By Kevin Landers
    Thursday June 19, 2014 4:36 PM

    COLUMBUS, Ohio – Overgrown weeds. Tumbling bricks. Neighbors of a southwest Columbus vacant building want it gone. 10TV took their concerns to the city and tomorrow, they’ll see action.

    READ MORE: http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2014/06/19/columbus-vacant-buildings-anger-neighbors.html

    #1025528

    substance
    Participant

    Bobbie Root had no title in the article, so I assume he was just a man-on-the-street interview? I’ve never understood the point of asking random passersby how they feel about something that they know absolutely nothing about.

    Awful, just to get the quote they want.

    The city needs to figure out a way to make it more expensive for the owner to sit on the building in the current condition.

    #1025575

    Achekov
    Participant

    If the buildings pose a safety hazard, can’t the city use eminent domain to take them?

    The ironic thing is that the better the rest of downtown starts to look from all the new development, the worse these buildings look by comparison.

    #1026108

    News
    Participant

    City Considers What to do with Vacant High Street Properties
    June 24, 2014 1:25 pm – Jesse Bethea

    Columbus has development on the brain and a low tolerance for vacant buildings, particularly Downtown and particularly on coveted High Street. So it’s no wonder the vacant buildings at 72 North High have become such a topic of interest that 10TV devoted not one but two stories to the buildings and their owners last week.

    READ MORE: https://www.columbusunderground.com/city-considers-what-to-do-with-vacant-high-street-properties-jb1

    #1030737
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Just noticed this up on a front window a few days ago…

    #1030765

    heresthecasey
    Participant

    Hrm. I really hope these buildings are not headed for demolition…

    #1030768
    Josh Miller
    Josh Miller
    Participant

    Just noticed this up on a front window a few days ago…

    We must’ve walked by within minutes of each other because I snapped the same pic during lunch…
    Really, really hope this isn’t the last requirement needed to proceed with a demolition permit.
    vacant high buildings madisons

    #1030799
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Hrm. I really hope these buildings are not headed for demolition…

    +1

    #1030818

    drtom1234
    Participant

    Demolition for a new parking lot would be disastrous. Demolition for a new build, that I would be ok with.

    #1030821

    wpcc88
    Participant

    Demolition for a new parking lot would be disastrous. Demolition for a new build, that I would be ok with.

    Honestly a developer trying to get a good deal would not surprise me

    #1030825
    King Gambrinus
    King Gambrinus
    Participant

    Does this allow the city to take control over the property on public safety grounds or anything?

    #1030875

    columbusmike
    Participant

    I believe it just means the city has revoked their occupancy permit…which, to the deadbeat owner, probably doesn’t mean a whole lot to them, except their property value is pretty much worthless now, and their insurance coverage is probably through the roof.

    #1033248
    jbaker544
    jbaker544
    Participant

    These are really cool historic buildings and if saved could keep that historic look of the block, however I would settle for anything then parking lots. There are already large surface lots across the street. Being only a block from city center and creating a “dead zone” between the Short North, Capital and the Commons, I believe it in the city’s best interest to do something with these buildings. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 138 total)

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

Subscribe below: