Our City Online

Messageboard

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard.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

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 386 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 2015 Columbus Metro and County Population Estimates #1127476

    WJT
    Participant

    At this rate, Columbus’ population will be at 900k by 2020. Barring any dramatic changes in current trends, we could very easily see 1 million people within the city proper limits before 2030.

    It will be curious to see what impact Columbus’ continued growth has on the rest of the state, and on the multi-state region in general. Columbus and Indianapolis remain the only two major Midwestern cities that have been seeing steady population growth from decade to decade. Even Chicago has stagnated and lost population in recent years, and is actually in danger now of being overtaken by Houston as the third largest US city.

    At some point, I wonder if Cleveland and Cincinnati seek to take one or more drastic measures to avoid becoming complete afterthoughts in a state where the capital has become the principal city on so many fronts and no longer merely serves as the seat of state government. As politically untenable as city-county consolidations and between-city mergers have been, Dayton being only the latest to stop a proposal dead in its tracks, I can’t help but think that both NE and SW Ohio, and perhaps Toledo/NW Ohio as well will eventually look at and finally act on these, and even more radical restructuring measures of some kind, just to stay relevant and viable as metropolitan areas, and other rust belt cities outside of Ohio like Pittsburgh and Buffalo may very well join them, or even pave the way. Declining suburbs and crumbling infrastructure will each exact huge tolls on take a huge toll on political barriers to change.

    Any other cities I can see this possibly happening, but Cincy and Cleveland? They have such poor relationships with their suburbs that I don’t see it ever happening. I think many suburban residents of those two cities would move or kill their first born children to avoid such a thing happening.

    Also with win/win in effect here and new annexations going directly to Cbus city schools, I think any new large annexations to Cbus are history. Even here, how would Dublin, New Albany, Worthington, Upper Arlington, etc respond to a city/county merger idea? lol even Lincoln Village and Blacklick Estates fought off annexation attempts by Columbus for several decades. You would be able to hear the roar of outrage for a hundred miles.

    in reply to: 2015 Columbus Metro and County Population Estimates #1127355

    WJT
    Participant

    The city proper estimates are out today from the census bureau, with Columbus projected to have gained 12,175 Y-O-Y to 850,106.

    Great news! Keeping right up with the 11-12,000 per year growth.

    Since 2010, We have gone from being over 30,000 under Indianapolis to being just 3,000 under. We added 12,000, they added 4,000. We are probably past Indy at this point in 2016.

    Where have we put the nearly 62,000 plus people since 2010?

    in reply to: RiverSouth District – News & Updates #1127351

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>MichaelC wrote:</div>
    I believe this is it.

    If so, they misplaced the dot. The dot is on the east side of the tracks north of Rich, whereas the project linked to is on the west side of the tracks and south of Rich. See also – https://www.columbusunderground.com/details-revealed-on-five-story-310-unit-mixed-use-buildings-in-east-franklinton

    I hope this is the case. Isn’t this the one where the city actually requested more height because of the possible views?

    in reply to: Scioto Peninsula Development – News & Updates #1127002

    WJT
    Participant

    The Dispatch today had an article on River South. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/05/17/riversouth-transforms-downtown-wasteland-to-vibrant-district.html.

    They have a map with a list of proposed/under-construction/completed projects. Number 9 on the map they have is across the river on the triangle of land south of COSI that was supposed to be the place of the downtown zoo. It says ‘unnamed, five story mixed use building, proposed.

    Is this a mistake or is there some proposal for that site that I have not heard about?

    in reply to: The Arbor #1126341

    WJT
    Participant

    If the current lot services Nationwide Children’s Hospital employees, I too guess that the added spaces are not necessarily for residents only and will be like other projects with parking components that are made to serve residents and the public. I don’t see anything ridiculous about a below grade deck with great amenities and lack of massive surface lots for residents. The proposed millennial tower will have roughly 500% more spaces compared to residential units yet the argument that it is for public and nearby employees seems to be well accepted. (That is if i remember the numbers correctly) Why is 50% more so absurd here? Perhaps because it’s not contributing to the mass of the structure or height? By your argument, we should be advocating for less parking at the M resulting in a shorter tower, no?

    You can’t forget that the parking for the new tower will serve the approximately 100 units(and they will be high end and demand not only one but possibly two spaces, especially for the condos) plus the ground floor retail, and most importantly, almost 200,000 square feet of office space. The five floor new Nationwide building downtown has about that amount of square footage, and I think has about 1,000 employees. 180,000 square feet of office space should have over 500 employees easily.

    Also with the Two25 planned to take up much of the huge City Center garage, there will be more pressure on existing garages, like the one next to this planned tower, so they have to include a decent amount of parking until we can get our public transit together(if ever).

    Regarding this Arbor project, given how it is handled(mostly underground with amenities on top) and that it will serve probably not only residents but others nearby, I am ok with it really. They can always plop some more apts. on the smaller surface lot later if they have too much parking(LOL! in Columbus-too much parking!!! as if.)

    in reply to: Millennial Tower #1126278

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>mbeaumont wrote:</div>
    Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

    Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

    A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

    I would hope it’s more than a name and in reality a serious push at finally trying to reach a badly missed demographic for downtown. I’m not talking about dirt cheap housing. There are plenty of millennials and YPs who can afford a decent place but are completely priced out by downtown inventory. I will be unbelievably disappointed if we hear that this is yet another option that completely prices out most of this generation.

    And no, I am not a millennial but I understand they’re a key piece to building a better downtown.

    I would bet this is going very high end. With all of the amenities and with only 90-110 units this is going to be expensive housing. If they did try to make it less expensive they would cut amenities and value engineer the hell out of this-and they might value engineer the hell out of it anyways and we will get something much less bold. If you look at new proposals across the nation in a variety of cities and see the original proposal and then see what is built, this is quite common and disappointing-the redesigns, cutbacks, value engineering.

    As someone mentioned somewhere, those huge cantilevered balconies will likely be cut back, and I would bet that screen for the parking will be replaced with something much more mundane-and cheaper.

    in reply to: The Arbor #1126277

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jbcmh81 wrote:</div>
    http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/05/11/163-unit-apartment-complex-planned-for-parsons.html

    A new residential project for the Near South Side at 482 South Lane. Although the project will replace a large chunk of the surface parking in this area, 245 spaces for 163 units is ridiculous.

    The alternatives transportation options are just not good enough in Columbus at this time it seems. We have a bus system that is not that great, if only the city would decide to start with that and try to have one of the best bus systems in the country that would be a start.

    Many people may be ready for something other than a private car(or cars) but until there is an alternative that is acceptable this is what we are going to get. Even if people would accept less parking, if the developers provide it, the residents are probably not going to complain-are the developers responding to the consumers, or are they just assuming this is what the potential residents want?

    At least much of it is covered and not provided as a huge surface lot-that is actually progress here! lol.

    * I wonder if there are any really in-depth recent studies of what people moving into the central areas of the city expect or want in terms of public transit and what attitudes are towards the private car, existing public transit, future options, etc? Also, why did the developer think they needed to provide 245 spaces? Has anyone asked?

    in reply to: The Arbor #1126275

    WJT
    Participant

    http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/05/11/163-unit-apartment-complex-planned-for-parsons.html

    A new residential project for the Near South Side at 482 South Lane. Although the project will replace a large chunk of the surface parking in this area, 245 spaces for 163 units is ridiculous.

    The alternatives transportation options are just not good enough in Columbus at this time it seems. We have a bus system that is not that great, if only the city would decide to start with that and try to have one of the best bus systems in the country that would be a start.

    Many people may be ready for something other than a private car(or cars) but until there is an alternative that is acceptable this is what we are going to get. Even if people would accept less parking, if the developers provide it, the residents are probably not going to complain-are the developers responding to the consumers, or are they just assuming this is what the potential residents want?

    At least much of it is covered and not provided as a huge surface lot-that is actually progress here lol.

    in reply to: Millennial Tower #1126157

    WJT
    Participant

    The problem with green walls in Central Ohio is that very few things that could be incorporated into a green wall stay green for more than 6-7 months of the year. The other months you have a brown dead looking wall. Even a mass of the hardiest English Ivy would brown out/windburn in an exposed location on a building.

    in reply to: Millennial Tower #1126148

    WJT
    Participant

    They can name it the spoiledrichtrustfundsh*t tower and I would not care as long as it gets built. Names can change.

    in reply to: Kaufman Developments Buys Short North Land #1124539

    WJT
    Participant

    Too bad they cannot gobble up the northwest corner of Price and High(the little mini-mall) along with it.

    [dreamland] and then on this larger parcel, was built the iconic 30 story Short North Tower, a landmark building and architectural marvel serving as a beacon for the Short North for miles around and instantly recognized as a tapering masterpiece and beloved by both Short North residents and all who beheld it’s timeless beauty[/dreamland] lol. ;)

    in reply to: White City:The new urban blight is rich people #1122317

    WJT
    Participant

    (Why am I responding… why am I responding… walk away… Aw, eff it.)

    Ok, I just drafted this whole response and then deleted it. Again, you don’t know me, you don’t know anything about me, and there is no reason for me to defend myself to you. You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. I know which one I am, and I’m sure you think you know which one you are, too.

    Best of luck.

    I realize my posts were a stretch as well. And no, I don’t know you or anyone who posted, I could only reply or respond to what people said in one or two posts-which is not necessarily and indicator of who they are. What was expressed appeared to me to be racist. That does not necessarily mean the person is racist or a bigot- I could have worded things better and clarified myself in my responses, I admit that.

    I have found that the us vs them take on things is rarely accurate. Things are rarely completely black and white(excuse the pun), most things are shades of gray and most ‘truths’ fall somewhere in the middle, as most opinions do also. Taking a ‘with us or against us’ view is usually not productive and runs counter to cooperation and finding common ground-which is when progress is usually made. I may have strong opinions but I am ultimately a ‘let’s work together and find some common ground’ type of person.

    Best of luck to you as well.

    in reply to: White City:The new urban blight is rich people #1122257

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>WJT wrote:</div>
    The veiled racism in this thread is pretty awful. I posted a link to this thread so people could see the references to ‘hip hop’, sagging, little thugs, etc.-all the references to white vs black areas of town. It is disgraceful. I grew up in a working class area and live in one now and it is cultural thing-trashy is trashy and has no color.

    The reference to Columbus not turning into ‘Detroit’ is classic. To the white bigots who posted-congratulations on your white privilege-I am sure you will keep doing what you can to keep it.

    And therein lies the issue. I have no problem having an open and honest discussion about privilege, perceived or otherwise. But I can’t help but bristle when, regardless of the fact that you don’t know me or anything about me, you assume #1 – that I’m white and #2 – that I’m a bigot. How is that furthering the discussion?

    You were responding to someone saying they had no guilt for being ‘childless moneyed and white’ so I think that part was not an unreasonable assumption given your response.

    And your post in general

    Thank you. I resent the fact that the people who have the means to prevent Columbus from becoming Detroit should somehow feel guilt for doing so. “You’re doing your part, but you aren’t sacrificing everything you’ve worked for, so shame! Shame!” BS.

    is pretty ‘out there’ and sure makes you sound like an entitled jerk at best, if not a bigot. How was any part of your post really ‘furthering the discussion’ as you say? And I said your post was ‘classic’-I never directly called you a ‘bigot’-guilty conscience maybe?

    in reply to: White City:The new urban blight is rich people #1121986

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>ImNotaStar wrote:</div>
    Just wondering why we need affordavle housing in a particular neighborhood? Isn’t that why one goes to school and works hard so they can live where they want? I really don’t understand why everything has to be equal.

    You think people who want affordable housing don’t work hard? I live downtown. If I want downtown to be vibrant, we need better retail diversity and density, both of which would be achieved through income diversity. We need residents who would give up their cars. We need more younger people who can build vibrancy to the neighborhoods.

    Why in the world would anyone want our downtown to only be accessible to rich people?

    Because everyone has the same start in life, everyone has equal opportunity, because life is fair, because no wealthy people who have ‘made it’ have had it given to them on a silver platter-they all worked their asses off for it of course and all ‘the poors’ and less wealthy are lazy and did not want to learn or work hard, right? Rigggghhhttt! [/sarcasm]. They just do not get it.

    We would like diversity because we think it is enriching to people who are a part of it. And affordable housing or workforce housing does not mean letting criminals have a free reign in a neighborhood. Also because maybe some of us don’t think that exclusivity and segregation are not what our nation is supposed to be about?

    *Also if the person who hacked my computer happens to be from this thread-yes I do like my clicks thank you. Funny how that has never happened to me-until right after I posted in this thread. Probably just a coincidence but who knows?

    in reply to: UDF (and adjacent lot) in SN exploring redevelopment #1121627

    WJT
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>WJT wrote:</div>
    It is hilarious that classical music is such a repellent. Why do so many people hate it so much that it can be used in this way? lol

    Unless you’ve worked in a place where it is constantly running, you have no clue haha!

    Well anything that is constantly running will either drive you nuts or break you down and make you a faithful convert lol.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 386 total)

Subscribe below: