Forum Replies Created
Real-time is already out of date! I mean what major city hasn’t had real-time for 4-5 years. PLUS there are many apps now that work with COTA’s bus route data and are pretty close to real time. COTA NEEDS TO DROP real-time and use its money for something else. PLUS COTA had real-time back in 2010/2011 before “upgrading” their real-time tracking…5 years later..NOTHING!
Word is (according to the Dispatch and others) that a real time release is impending in a matter of weeks.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but COTA built a couple transfer stations in the last few years, how did they not add ticket machines to these new stations? To only have a couple ticket machines is ridiculous on top of all the other ways COTA lags behind technologically. Here we are again saying ‘it’s 20xx, time to enter the 21st century’. Sort of like SPARCC, Wonder, etc. copy and paste updates and complaints year to year with little to no movement but assurances that plans are in the works. Oh look, another consultant fee. I’d hate to turn down a tax levy but if they aren’t doing anything concrete to improve rider experience beyond making different routes and sprucing up bus stops, it’s hard to sell the idea we should keep throwing money at them only to be behind the times anyway.
Also, trip passes (5 & 10 trip) are available at the vending machines at High & Broad and in the transit centers on Spring Street and the Commons Garage.
A cautionary tale from Seattle, where residential growth has cause conflict with other kinds of amenities. Some popular music clubs have closed after housing grew up around them. Seattle’s Capitol Hill was a huge boutique/nightlife area and was sort of their epicenter of nightlife like our short north. However as the area gentrified and ‘tourism’ increased, residents have been pushing to curtail the “rowdy” atmosphere, which many of the areas supporters feel gives the area its character.
Whats the definition of ‘Downtown’ here? The CBD? The Short North? Brewery District?
There is plenty of variety and nodes of development within the more broad urban area, and within the actual boundaries of Downtown to accommodate much more residential development alongside everything else. ‘Bar’ districts are ever-changing, especially in Columbus, so I’d say there isn’t much to worry about there.
Most ‘downtown’s’ of our peer cities have twice our downtown population. I think if you add up all of that, we can safely say: No, ‘too much’ downtown residential is not a bad thing. And thats without all the positive and efficient aspects of adding Downtown population.
The prospect of a Smithsonian and a satellite of the American Museum of Natural History along our riverfront strike me as major.
That’s all Columbus Monthly reported, so unfortunately, that’s all I’ve got.
Strikes me as odd that Columbus Monthly would be the only local media to report on something that would be a major major story for Columbus and that they wouldn’t post their scoop online? Maybe they’re just not that savvy?
If either of these materialize, they could be very transformative for the cultural scene in Columbus and for RiverSouth, Scioto Peninsula, and probably especially East Franklinton.December 21, 2015 1:11 pm at 1:11 pm in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1107597
I think the problem is thinking of Downtown as a neighborhood in and of itself. Its a vast area. We should break it down as River South, Discovery District, Arena District, etc. When thinking of it this way, the area suddenly seems more appealing, more inviting. There is something inherently wrong with the idea of “Downtown” as a neighborhood because the word is so associated with commercial activity.
That is not to say that the geographic reference itself enhances the desirability of those subdistricts–they are all on the cusp of major transformations. But I do think we should get away from the idea of Downtown, as a whole, as a neighborhood.
Very, very good point. It seems that when you focus on the nodes of activity (Arena District, River South, Gay Street, and South 4th) you can see how each of these clusters are growing organically and independently and that each one has a distinct feel and identity. I would also note that ‘Downtown’ really only makes sense as a name in NYC, where it truly refers to being ‘down’ the island. I imagine that as each node or downtown neighborhood develops further they will enter the public conciseness as neighborhoods in their own rite.December 21, 2015 1:05 pm at 1:05 pm in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1107596
Article must be wrong. There has been zero residential development at Easton. In fact all of eatson and the surrounding strip malls were developed by what 3 different developers, maybe 4? Casto is the only one I can think of that developed at Easton and downtown. New Albany I agree with but that article is clearly wrong. There has been no shift from eatson to downtown multifamily was never built in Easton beyond 1 building.
The article wasn’t on residential development, it was on commercial development.December 20, 2015 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1107547
When a city says it has strong neighborhoods instead of downtown development (though strong neighborhoods are certainly a plus), it’s just another way of saying “We just couldn’t build a strong downtown.”
I think it’s more of an admission that there has, for some time been little focus on Downtown development and revitalization than there was in the near Downtown neighborhoods (German, Victorian, Italian Villages, University area). That obviously changed course around 10 or so years ago and we’re finally seeing the payoff.
They do customs for Cancun in Columbus. It was fairly simple and only staffed for the specific flight I was on. Seems like it would probably work for one more additional international flight.
One detrimental impact of these new bike lanes that I’ve noticed, at least along N4th St during rush hour: Because there are now just two lanes, cars back up bumper-to-bumper along much or all of the distance between E2nd Ave and E5th Ave. This makes it pretty much impossible to cross N4th street driving either east or west on any of the cross streets along that segment of 4th. There is never a break in the northbound 4th St. traffic. The only way to dependably cross now is at the light at 2nd. That’s going to make 2nd more heavily backed up. I realize prior to the new lanes that traffic also backed up along 4th, but not as much as it does now. You used to be able to use the cross streets.
For over 4 years, I used to bike commute from the southern part of the Short North to an 8-5 office job on Morse Rd riding up N4th every day in the AM, returning along Summit in the PM. Recognizing that I was not riding WITH the heaviest direction of rush hour traffic, I found both 4th & Summit to be pretty manageable to ride along as they were. The riding lanes or margins stayed clean too. There were wider than normal margins along both sides of each street and plenty of room to avoid the traffic driving up along side of me. For streets with heavy traffic, I found Summit & 4th to be the among easiest to ride on.
I haven’t tried the new bike lanes yet so I could be mistaken, but based on visual observation while driving my car, I wonder if things weren’t better the old way. Also, because motorists are not used to this new layout, it seems like cyclists are forced to expose themselves to a lot more uncertainty by riding in a bike lane that’s kind of out in the area where cars used to be. At least until motorists get used to it, that seems more risky to cyclist than the old set up. Maybe over time, this new set up will prove to work better. Maybe the heavier traffic back ups will divert traffic to other arteries, lessening traffic on Summit & 4th. I applaud all efforts to make improvements for cyclists.
Lanes were only removed between 11th and Hudson, not to the south.November 20, 2015 11:49 am at 11:49 am in reply to: Cleveland's beautiful, modern apartment proposal for downtown #1103280
Awesome development, hope that it comes to fruition.
Its apples and oranges to compare whats happening in Downtown CLE to Cbus. Development and growth have been concentrated in Downtown CLE for years in the same way that growth here has been concentrated in SN, German Village, Grandview, Campus ect.
Cleveland also had a great building stock that could easily be converted to residential, not the case in Columbus.
Much different than the original proposal. A lot more lower-priced apartments packed in.
I think this was the comment I was responding to, and he discussion that followed. No offense implied on my end, its just that these are the opposite of ‘lower-priced.’ Maybe Ned will make the argument that he is referring to building quality and materials, which I can accept more but still would argue with. Even with design flaws, these are likely built with more high quality materials due to design review and guidelines than elsewhere around the city.
Jeffery Park is a mix of rental and owner occupied. The townhouse are technically single family homes. Also, lower priced housing? The Foundry starts out at $1,000 per month for ~600 sqft. I wouldn’t consider that anywhere near lower priced.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Walker Evans wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>drew wrote:</div><br>
…an instinctual desire for density through shiny spendy new things we’ve seen somewhere else…
I don’t think that oversimplification is a fair generalization to make.
Maybe not, but our city limits sprawl much more than just about any other city of our size, and our development patterns are almost all focused on an area within a mile or so of downtown. This development pattern, which is not solely motivated by private interests, is an ‘every city’ approach to a city that’s not like every city.
Honestly, I see our development over the last 5-10 years as a matter of trying to play catch up with others, rather than playing our own game.
Maybe the ‘urban’ development pattern but Columbus and our suburbs are not limiting sprawl in any meaningful way.
The architecture of the north building is much improved. I question the south more but it seems to work from an urban design standpoint. The reality is there will be a lot of hand-wringing about the height and density of this project, however at the end of the day filling in what is the largest and most depressing whole in High Street will be a huge net positive. This will likely spur more construction in the vital Gay Street area, and there are plenty more surface lots for a tall building. And the height advocates (including myself) can hold out hope for a taller tower at Long and High.
Lots of good news for downtown recently.November 18, 2015 6:01 pm at 6:01 pm in reply to: LC RiverSouth – 8-Story & 10-Story Apartment Buildings at High & Rich #1102641
I recently moved to Columbus from Indy, and have been surprised at the lack of downtown construction compared to Indy. Columbus has so many proposed buildings, but if they actually get built is another story.<br>
This project is one most cities would kill for, great density and architecture, the current construction in downtown Indy is robust, but is mostly 3-5 story bland buildings.
I’ve heard a lot of interesting compare and contrasts of Indy/Cbus. Two cities who on the outside would seem to be very similar, but who in detailed seems to be interestingly different. I would love to hear more of your perspective as someone who has lived in both… (maybe another thread for that)