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NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard.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

Two25 17 Story High Rise Proposed for SE Columbus Commons

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Development Two25 17 Story High Rise Proposed for SE Columbus Commons

This topic contains 303 replies, has 60 voices, and was last updated by  Mike88 2 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 304 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1120128

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    Why would it be up to the city to provide parking for private companies? I can understand the public transit, that would be a city/state function, but parking should be a company specific item. In other major cities, the buildings have parking built into the building, sometimes underground, sometimes on a podium. Why can’t that be done here?

    *edit for spelling

    I would hope that companies located downtown would be motivated to give employees more and cheaper options to commute. Both from an employee engagement standpoint and for wanting a more vibrant downtown. Again, I’m talking out loud so I don’t know if I’m thinking realistically. Would be nice for alternative transportation would be a public/private partnership.

    #1120129

    ohbr
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>ohbr wrote:</div>
    Here’s a recent article with a link to the original article.

    https://www.columbusunderground.com/new-cota-program-surpasses-goal-in-getting-downtown-workers-commuting

    Abundant parking and vibrancy are inherently opposite concepts that actively work against each other.

    Not necessarily. As we’ve all pretty much agreed on for awhile, there is a way to appropriately incorporate parking. We’re just not doing it here. I agree with all your suggestions, but I also fully accept that decades of jobs built around suburban concepts and locations will not be suddenly converted to urban jobs with limited parking without MAJOR public transit upgrades based on some ideal of “we need to act like the major city we are”. Even in Cincinatti, many of these large projects and the development we see include plenty of parking options. People who based their home buying and living habits based on living and working in the suburbs for all these years aren’t suddenly going move closer to the city and near public transit because their job did. That takes time. Until then, the reality is, companies will still be looking to make sure that their employees have parking regardless of our urban ideals. I see no problem with a private company looking out for the interest of it’s employees over idealistic concepts. The city can and should put better requirements on parking structures as your second to last bullet says, but until then, we shouldn’t expect much more out of private companies until they are forced to make better decisions.

    #1120164

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>ohbr wrote:</div><br>
    Here’s a recent article with a link to the original article.

    https://www.columbusunderground.com/new-cota-program-surpasses-goal-in-getting-downtown-workers-commuting

    Abundant parking and vibrancy are inherently opposite concepts that actively work against each other.

    Not necessarily. As we’ve all pretty much agreed on for awhile, there is a way to appropriately incorporate parking. We’re just not doing it here. I agree with all your suggestions, but I also fully accept that decades of jobs built around suburban concepts and locations will not be suddenly converted to urban jobs with limited parking without MAJOR public transit upgrades based on some ideal of “we need to act like the major city we are”. Even in Cincinatti, many of these large projects and the development we see include plenty of parking options. People who based their home buying and living habits based on living and working in the suburbs for all these years aren’t suddenly going move closer to the city and near public transit because their job did. That takes time. Until then, the reality is, companies will still be looking to make sure that their employees have parking regardless of our urban ideals. I see no problem with a private company looking out for the interest of it’s employees over idealistic concepts. The city can and should put better requirements on parking structures as your second to last bullet says, but until then, we shouldn’t expect much more out of private companies until they are forced to make better decisions.

    I think it’s a mistake to try to bring in all the suburban jobs, anyway. I don’t think that’s a realistic goal. Companies like Abercrombie with their “campus” headquarters and massive amounts of surface lots are never going to come into the city. There will always be companies that have no interest in an urban location, regardless of the parking situation.
    While it’s not necessarily an issue for employers looking out for their employees, I don’t think it should automatically come at the sacrifice of the urban form. And besides, I am not saying that there can’t be parking, just that it has to be done right and that it can’t be the primary thought in development.

    #1120192

    ehill27
    Participant

    It isn’t like companies don’t have options of where to locate and are being forced to choose downtown and are being forced to use public transportation and not drive cars.

    This issue/goal isn’t forcing people to use mass transit, it’s giving options to those who are interested (among other reasons). This in turn decreases the need for additional parking / frees up spaces for those who prefer to drive.

    Time and time again, companies that relocate to downtown cite the desire to appeal to Millenials, whom often prefer –in larger numbers than former generations– to use mass transit and work in vibrant city centers.

    #1120212

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>JAL wrote:</div>
    It isn’t like companies don’t have options of where to locate and are being forced to choose downtown and are being forced to use public transportation and not drive cars.

    This issue/goal isn’t forcing people to use mass transit, it’s giving options to those who are interested (among other reasons). This in turn decreases the need for additional parking / frees up spaces for those who prefer to drive.

    Time and time again, companies that relocate to downtown cite the desire to appeal to Millenials, whom often prefer –in larger numbers than former generations– to use mass transit and work in vibrant city centers.

    Yup. Except, frustratingly, the that young resident who wants to live downtown for cheap without a car is completely priced out of the market. There are plenty of people who would use alternate transportation downtown. Cbus is a classic example. But we need to give them the means to do it.

    #1120219

    triggerfor81
    Participant

    Columbus always comes up excuses not to build big.

    #1120273
    Stephen43215
    Stephen43215
    Participant

    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    #1120396

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    Probably because it is more expensive to dig underground than building a block-sized garage. Minimum parking requirements just need to go away.

    #1120404

    Pablo
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Stephen43215 wrote:</div>
    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    Probably because it is more expensive to dig underground than building a block-sized garage. Minimum parking requirements just need to go away.

    There are no minimum parking requirements downtown.

    #1120496

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Stephen43215 wrote:</div><br>
    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    Probably because it is more expensive to dig underground than building a block-sized garage. Minimum parking requirements just need to go away.

    There are no minimum parking requirements downtown.

    If so, then the focus by the city and the development community would be even more frustrating. A forward-thinking policy like that is undermined by a continued focus on providing parking for every single person.

    #1120523

    CB_downtowner
    Participant

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

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Stephen43215 wrote:</div><br><br>
    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    Probably because it is more expensive to dig underground than building a block-sized garage. Minimum parking requirements just need to go away.

    There are no minimum parking requirements downtown.

    If so, then the focus by the city and the development community would be even more frustrating. A forward-thinking policy like that is undermined by a continued focus on providing parking for every single person.

    Maybe, but maybe not. Providing ample parking infrastructure buys the city time to chip away at the problem without delaying development. I agree with your premise, just don’t agree with the idea that it has to happen immediately. And I do like that the city is seemingly trying hard to chip away, between cogo and cbus, bike lanes, Uber and lyft, Cars2go, this Cota pilot, and the recent grant request I would hope these help improve the problem. As many have mentioned here, the bigger pivot needs to be encouraging more nondriving residential and in my opinion that means more affordable housing downtown.

    #1120581

    dcariens
    Participant

    A major part of the solution to parking and enticing more downtown development would be a streetcar and light rail system. Busses just don’t do it; neither does bus rapid transit. Cities everywhere are turning to rail as a way of solving problems and encouraging development. The latest to join are Kansas City, Oklahoma City, Milwaukee, Washington D.C. and even Cincinnati is not far from opening up a streetcar line. When I travel, I always book a hotel on a streetcar or light rail line. You have to wonder what why business and civil leaders in Columbus don’t get behind rail public transit. I would love to have recommended Columbus as the site for a major convention–but instead I recommended Charlotte. No point in rewarding dull minded city leaders with convention money.

    #1120609

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>

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

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Stephen43215 wrote:</div><br><br><br>
    What about building garages with private developments underground like other cities? It doesn’t have to be a 6 story parking garage taking up thne entire block!

    Probably because it is more expensive to dig underground than building a block-sized garage. Minimum parking requirements just need to go away.

    There are no minimum parking requirements downtown.

    If so, then the focus by the city and the development community would be even more frustrating. A forward-thinking policy like that is undermined by a continued focus on providing parking for every single person.

    Maybe, but maybe not. Providing ample parking infrastructure buys the city time to chip away at the problem without delaying development. I agree with your premise, just don’t agree with the idea that it has to happen immediately. And I do like that the city is seemingly trying hard to chip away, between cogo and cbus, bike lanes, Uber and lyft, Cars2go, this Cota pilot, and the recent grant request I would hope these help improve the problem. As many have mentioned here, the bigger pivot needs to be encouraging more nondriving residential and in my opinion that means more affordable housing downtown.

    Except I don’t really see where the city is making an effort to chip away at the real problem, which is transit. CoGo and the CBus are great, but their footprint is just too small to be effective in this regard, especially with people coming into Downtown from outer areas. Lyft and Car2Go are not mass transit and they are private companies, so Columbus really can’t be given credit for them. The only sort of discussion on mass transit is MORPC’s potential project list for 2016-2040, and many of those transit routes are probably at least 5, if not many more years away from being up and running, and that’s provided that funding is secured and the population doesn’t reject any proposals- not to mention that any routes will have to be studied over and over again. With the airport’s new terminal potentially having a multi-modal station, it would make sense to have at least a few lines connecting to it by the time it is completed, but who knows at this point. That wouldn’t be until 2030, anyway. So the city could very easily go another 14-15 years without a single additional mass transit option (and no, I still don’t count the CMAX which, despite how it is being sold, is really just another regular bus line). By then, Columbus will literally have been left behind by every major, or even not major, city in America. Not a great place to be, and certainly not a selling point for future growth.

    #1120611

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    A major part of the solution to parking and enticing more downtown development would be a streetcar and light rail system. Busses just don’t do it; neither does bus rapid transit. Cities everywhere are turning to rail as a way of solving problems and encouraging development. The latest to join are Kansas City, Oklahoma City, Milwaukee, Washington D.C. and even Cincinnati is not far from opening up a streetcar line. When I travel, I always book a hotel on a streetcar or light rail line. You have to wonder what why business and civil leaders in Columbus don’t get behind rail public transit. I would love to have recommended Columbus as the site for a major convention–but instead I recommended Charlotte. No point in rewarding dull minded city leaders with convention money.

    Dedicated-lane BRT routes would be okay. They’re still not as good at promoting line development as rail, but they would still be fixed routes and would function better than a standard bus. I’ve ridden dedicated-lane BRT many times in other cities, and it feels a lot like a train because of how the stations are like platforms and everything. It’s a shame that is not being done in Columbus. Streetcars, for me, are the lowest form of rail, and there has been a lot of criticism about how they’re being used in cites. The criticism is that a lot of the routes aren’t really for transit so much as promoting development along routes and being a tourist attraction. Plus, most of them are also not dedicated-lane, so they get stuck in traffic and in some cases are even slower than walking. If we’re going to go rail, I’d like to see it be actual light passenger rail (and heavy commuter rail to suburbs) rather than streetcars. No matter what gets built, its primary focus should be on moving people rather than providing economic incentive for private developers to throw up buildings along the route, or as something to move a few tourists around. Maximizing ridership should be the goal.

    #1120621

    dcariens
    Participant

    You need streetcars to connect close-in points of interest in the downtown and university areas. Busses get just as stuck in traffic as streetcars. Historic streetcar lines have been used in Dallas, San Francisco, and Memphis not only to get people around, but to attract tourists. In Columbus, the Ohio Railway Museum could be brought downtown and be used for easy, safe transit and as a tourist attraction. Light right could run on private right of ways to the outlying areas. The defunct proposal for a downtown to Polaris light rail was a great idea. Or, how about a streetcar line connecting the main hospitals–Nationwide Children’s, Grant, and University Hospitals. How about a streetcar line from the OSU through downtown and on to the growing cultural center on the west side of the Scioto? It may just be me, but I don’t use buses when I am on a business trip. It is either rail transit or taxis.

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 304 total)

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

Subscribe below: