Forum Replies Created
March 22, 2016 11:14 pm at 11:14 pm in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1119512
Construction workers on site today working as they have for the past few months.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div>
In some places yes. In the Short North the development is there. A street car is actually needed for mobility there, now.
Ned, see the NPR story I posted above. Cities are finding that their modern streetcars are performing poorly on travel times (worse than buses). Light rail with dedicated ROW is a different story.
If streetcars don’t improve transit, and the only benefit is to encourage development, the Short North is the last place in Columbus that needs this.
Its not the Streetcars are destined to be bad transit options. If they were given dedicated ROW, they would perform as well as light rail.February 29, 2016 8:54 am at 8:54 am in reply to: SN's Bollinger Tower being bought, possibly converted to hotel #1116192
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>SusanB wrote:</div>
I’m sure that they will dump all those poor seniors on the west or south sides where there is truly terrible COTA service and no grocery stores in walking distance. There’s a history of that in Columbus, with the low income developers being complicit. It’s all about the money, especially for the low income housing developers. And it certainly doesn’t help those neighborhoods designated as poor people dumping grounds stabilize. Columbus desperately needs mixed income communities, but we know that’s not going to happen and the few areas that are mixed income will be destroyed by this kind of development and poor people dumping.
I took a quick look at CMHA’s site and it looks like most of their available units are out in Whitehall and parts of Columbus that are that way, (south and east). I couldn’t find any info specifically on new senior housing. How would one find out where CMHA is building new senior housing?
From the article, CMHA’s stated reason for getting rid of this property is because they do not want to maintain physical property any longer. They are converting 100 units into 300 vouchers, not building more units.
My claim was not that. My claim was that folding Grandview into City of Columbus would eliminate Grandview as it is known, ruin the schools, drive property values down by a ton in both Grandview and the 5th by NW area and basically have no discernable benefits whatsoever to the City of either Columbus or Grandview.
All the places that I have read about that do City-County mergers, or something of the sort, tend to keep the pre-existing school systems and boundaries, while consolidating municipal government.
Edit: Also, as is seen in Clintonville, wealthy, mostly white areas that actually send their kids to Columbus Schools tend to have schools that are as ‘good’ as many suburban districts. So even a Grandview School System that was folded into CCS would likely remain essentially the same as long as its residents were wealthy.
Do you have kids in a school system? Have you spent time as a parent volunteer in one or more school systems?
I say this as there is so much more than goes into a school system than cost per pupil. The teachers, honestly, are equal regardless of school system. Busing, facilities, food service, etc. are important in some regard, but honestly in my 15 years as a parent in Grandview and longer than that as a volunteer in Columbus City, the cost per pupil is a number that has little meaning in terms of success. Grandview has facilities that are near decrepit. Our schools are ancient and need constant cash flow to keep them functioning. Our cafeteria food is substandard, we have miserable food service choices. When we vote a levy in Grandview, it is to keep the lights on, not to have some sort of serious academic benefit. We have old buildings. Period. If our kids play a sport we pay extra and it is a lot of money, if our kids are in AP classes, that costs extra too.
I guess we both agree that schools are funded poorly, but I dont personally thing more money per pupil fixes a darn thing. That is based on first hand experience in multiple central Ohio school districts.
I have been in Ohio schools, especially in the country that are amazing facilities, that rival a college campus. Does not have a bearing on success. The teachers are the same.
School success is determined period, Amen, by the parents of the children of the school system and how much time they volunteer towards the success of their kids in academics, athletics, fund raising, extra-curricular activities and tutoring.
Good schools have a large volume of active parents, poor functioning schools do not, funding is a small variable.
We pay extra in Grandview to keep extremely old, falling apart 100 year old buildings alive because we have no land to build a new facility on. No other reason. We dont have better food, smarter teachers, easier to read books, or comfy desks.
Grandview succeeds because starting in kindergarten, every single teacher can count on a dozen parents showing up to help tutor kids so that they dont have to wrestle six groups of four kids, they get to wrestle three, because three other parents are helping groups of four kids learn how to read and write. Out in the hallway because our rooms are small and old and we dont have extra space.
Been there, done that, saw it does not happen in the City Schools. When I would go to tutor at Windsor(where the teachers were absolutely awesome), I was the only parent there and my kid was 10 miles away. They had a 90% kid turnover. One teacher with 24 kids does is not as effective as one teacher and four parent helpers with 24 kids.
That is the unfortunate reality of public education in Ohio, and it has zero to do with funding.
The people who harp about money, like you are, like as not, have no kids and have not spent five minutes of their FREE time in a school volunteering. It aint the money that is the problem
Can’t hurt that GH is 95% White with a Median Household Income of $85,089 vs Columbus at 61% White and Income of $44,072. Easy to vilify people, hard to get rid of institutional/generational poverty.February 24, 2016 9:49 pm at 9:49 pm in reply to: Why hasn\'t Clinton Twp been Annexed by nearby cities? #1115670
For efficiency’s sake Columbus needs to annex Clinton Twp West. It makes no sense so have the services spread out and with OSU focused on tech development on Kinnear it would make sense to have it all in one jurisdiction. Lots of improvements need to be made in the area but an eventual redevelopment of the Lennox and Kinnear areas would be better to happen in Columbus than Clinton Twp.
Its all about dedicated Right of Way. Streetcar systems or trams that have dedicated ROW tend to function well, much more like LTR but cheaper.February 24, 2016 9:11 am at 9:11 am in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1115512
Honestly they might have bitten off a bit more than they can chew in this case. They have projects going in three different states and on top of that this is only their second trip into urban development.
I think you may be underestimating the size/scale of the LC operation. For instance:
They also seem to have had projects coming online recently in Nashville and Louisville. If anytime it’s probably good that LC lined up to develop these sites because it seems like they are one of the few groups that does have the capability in Columbus.
From today’s Cleveland.com (February 11, 2016)
New 20 story tower for residents a go-with groundbreaking next month in University Circle.
Its astonishing how much public money is going into the project and how many ‘strings’ are being pulled to make it happen. Connected to the Two25 thread, is it really worth it to build projects like that if they need propped up with tax dollars?February 5, 2016 12:26 pm at 12:26 pm in reply to: Two25 17 Story High Rise Proposed for SE Columbus Commons #1113568
Unless you hate the urban form or have no understanding of it, there are petty basic, tangible standards that have already been established. In the broadest terms, the better the density of population, the more walkable neighborhoods become because that population brings about increased levels of amenities in the area. The only question here is what level of density is acceptable, and that appears to be the basis of the disagreement. Is a general 4-6-story with the very limited 10-12-story neighborhood acceptable density Downtown? Or should it be a general 10-12 story neighborhood with a limited 4-6-story as well as the occasional 20-30-story? Right now, the consensus seems to be that the 4-6 is better, but then that also contradicts with stated goals. It will bring increased density, but not to even levels of the past. This doesn’t particularly strike me as doing anything but bare minimum.
You are confusing height with density, and density with urban design. Both sets of things are related but don’t always correlate. Tall buildings can (and do) have much less ‘density’ than short ones. ‘Dense’ buildings can be badly designed or urban vitality.
Miranova is a great example of a building that tickles the edifice complex but falls short on all other measures. Sure, its pretty, but it has less units (read: density) than 250 S High and no street presence adding basically no vitality to downtown. A similar story can be told of North Bank. Meanwhile 250 High, Highpoint, The Normandy & Neilson, the Julian, LC Projects, and even Gay Street condos add much more positive street presence, vitality, and meaningful population than any ‘towers’ that have been built in Columbus thus far.
To bring it back around, Two25 will be a fantastic addition to the Commons and downtown at 12 stories and will only further enhance the already growing RiverSouth, S High, and S 4th node. The economics won’t work on taller buildings downtown until the demand is much stronger, which means we probably need to fill in 20 more parking lots with 5-10 story buildings.February 3, 2016 10:12 am at 10:12 am in reply to: Two25 17 Story High Rise Proposed for SE Columbus Commons #1113226
Many European cities are low- to mid- rise, and are no worse off for it (including in measures of density). To my mind, high rises are only sensible in areas of extreme land shortage, and in areas that don’t meet that criteria they’re often just symbols of tacky wealth chasing tacky prestige….
So much of our relative lack of confidence as a city comes from looking at what we’re not rather than what we are. And, what we are is a city of neighborhoods. We should build on that, and we should understand that our enduring appeal will not come from looking like everyone else or doing what everyone else does. That’ll just make us anonymous.
This. As a city we should be measuring ourselves based on the vibrancy of our streets and the urban design at street level, not an ‘edifice complex’ that says if we’re not building a 20 story building we’re failing. Most of the tall buildings we currently have are detrimental to the vitality of Downtown, not additive due to poor urban design.
Rather than form, lets evaluate ourselves on function. Whether a building is five stories or ten or twenty, if its adding to the streetscape, if it improves vibrancy, if it has a good urban design, then it will be a positive for the city. I would much rather our city be know as one of bustling storefronts and full sidewalks than one of tall buildings.January 15, 2016 12:24 pm at 12:24 pm in reply to: Short North White Castle Site to Be Mixed-Use Development #1110920
The Business First article states that they hope to start construction in the summer. With the economy becoming unstable and an apartment glut looming, I am not sure if this or many other PROPOSED projects will materialize.
Here is an opinion piece from the Dispatch that gives some insights into the real time progress:
LOL- if you’re not in Powell, its stack and pack.
But doesn’t it strike you (or anyone else) Edwards seems to be the only game in town with these downtown redevelopment stack and packs? Seems shady to me.
It does not, since they are certainly not the ‘only game’ downtown. Or even on Gay Street for that matter.