ck

Another explanation I heard is that 20-30 years ago they started removing lead from schools and all sorts of bldgs around the city. Now, the kids who grew up lead free are apparently less inclined to violence; as it has been shown that there is a definite link between lead exposure and violence. I find it amusing sometimes that police will always take credit, or a mayor (ahem... giuliani) will or the city council will etc... They say that their new "crime tracking" software made the crime stop! Or that flooding the streets with cops made all the criminals stop being criminals etc.. I would say usually there's more of a socioeconomic reason behind these numbers (which absolutely could include an increased police presence) and that one thing will hardly ever contribute that much of a decline. How many cities have the same technology that NY is using? Did they see the same drop in numbers? Weren't the numbers dropping before 2003? There must be another explanation -

True, but that's why they're building it... They are trying to make Columbus more walkable, more dense...

The lincoln street design (aka target symbol/ bicycle spokes?) looks alright... but what is with the central market? No way should they put a "central" market there when the north market is 5 minutes away... I think people would get confused But maybe some sort of grocery store would be nice...

still think it looks horrible...

Well that was my point - I can get to the atlantic in less time than it takes to get half way to the middle of the "mid west" -- What's your point? My point was that the midwest is too large of a region. When people hear midwest they think of farms and dull lives. While that may be true in Nebraska or Iowa, it certainly is not the feel you would get if you were to visit the many cities in Ohio. One of the most populated states in the country, and one of even fewer states with 3 major cities and a bunch of smaller but well known ones. That's nice... Anyway, I was saying that people in Seattle felt differently about different cities in Ohio... They feel Cleveland is east coast, columbus is midwest etc... I wasn't arguing Cleveland is on the atlantic?!?! Where'd you get that from? And you think it's alright to say you are from the great lakes region...of ohio... but the rest of Ohio isn't? So wouldn't that mean Philly isn't really an "east coast" city since it isn't on the coast? Or for sure Las Vegas isn't on the west coast. And I guess Buffalo is actually more of a Niagra Falls city than anything else. Or by your standard, I guess it's canadian...

2 things: 1) Since skybus started, I keep hearing how there are 6.2-6.7 million people within 100 miles of Columbus... So, really, you could say Columbus' metro area alone is 1/3 of NYC's --- Which aint half bad... But really, columbus metro area is like 1.5-1.7 million and NYC's (last I heard) was around 18 million. 2) What the hell is the MIDWEST???!??! Please!! I mean really? We're in the same region as Nebraska? How's that work? I could drive to D.C., NYC etc from Columbus in about 8-10 hours. I don't think I would get half way to nebraska in that time. And apparently we're the heart of the midwest according to multiple people... How's that work out? We are the farthest state to the east in the alleged 'Midwest' - but whatever... The proper term is the Great Lakes Region I believe. I prefer to refer to it as the rust belt region or great lakes... Midwest gives the wrong impression. I live in Seattle now and people constantly think of Iowa when I say Ohio. If I say Cleveland, then that's east coast, if I say Columbus, then that's midwest, and if I say Cincy, well people don't really know what to think of cincy... equated w/ pittsburgh sometimes. We need to settle on something other than midwest, because that really should be left to states like Iowa or Nebraska.

That is a funny way to think about it --- But, technically speaking, the insurance industry loses money when bad things happen. They need bad things to happen in order to get people to buy the insurance, but I think they would rather bad things not happen so they would never have to pay people out. And then for Children's hospital -- There are births there, that's a good thing... =) I prefer to think of it as the industry of making things right again =)

If we can get a damn grocery store down there and good bus service... who knows, maybe people will actually consider downtown instead of German Village/Short North/et al...

Have you guys seen the video on their site? I looked at the drawings and they looked pretty blah... But when I watched the video I was rather impressed...

http://travel.latimes.com/articles/la-trw-skybus-sandiego-flight-20aug07?page=1

For all you guys getting thin on top - I started noticing it a few years back and was pretty depressed about it. So I just did some quick research and found most believe the main cause of baldness is DHT (byproduct of testosterone). There were a bunch of ads for things to help you stop producing testosterone (which would stop DHT naturally), but that made you a woman - so, not so much. Anyway, lignans found in flax hulls natually bond to DHT and carry it out without it harming your follicles. So, I have now been taking flax lignans (also a known antioxidant) for about 3 years with absolutely no more hair loss. I'm sure it won't last forever, but its keeping it at the -need a very bright light to tell- stage. So, although its still bothersome, it's helped. Just a suggestion in case anyone cared. And yeah, short hair is good for thinning hair =)

Well, grove city is lacking in the charm department that's for sure. But, I suppose if it fits their needs, then so be it =)

I'm going to take a skybus flight back to columbus just to see a game - guaranteed (if skybus is still around in 09)

I got a 100! :-D http://www.walkscore.com/get-score.shtml?street=1526+3rd+ave+Seattle%2C+WA+98101&go=Go Seattle's downtown is nice to live in, but there are no grocery stores for at least a couple miles. There is the famous Pike Place Market 2 blocks away, but it's a bit pricey. I don't have a car, and I do just fine, so I suppose it's accurate enough.

there is a really cool section of worthington that has a bunch of Frank Lloyd Wright style houses.... It'd be cool to get a whole thread on that...

Airport has record June thanks to Skybus push Wednesday, July 25, 2007 - 3:26 AM By Marla Matzer Rose THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH Skybus helped Port Columbus to another record month in June as the airport logged a 19 percent increase in passengers compared with June 2006. In its first full month of operation, the Columbus-based startup airline vaulted to the sixth-biggest carrier at the airport in June, according to data released by Port Columbus yesterday. Skybus carried 63,860 passengers while airport leader Southwest Airlines had 159,195. In all, 725,012 passengers passed through Port Columbus in June, up from 608,890 in June 2006. With those numbers, Port Columbus logged its busiest-ever first half of the year with 11.7 percent growth from the same period a year ago. The number of flights was up 10.4 percent for the month and 6.3 percent for the first half of the year. Full article: http://www.columbusdispatch.com/dispatch/content/business/stories/2007/07/25/cmh_junestats.ART_ART_07-25-07_C8_B07CCM7.html

lol

It was mentioned above that Skybus wasn't getting any real national attention... Living in Seattle, I can tell you that is not true. Not only did pretty much all the major newspapers and television stations announce it (NYTimes, Washington Post, CNN, FOX et al.), but every city Skybus is flying into runs a few pieces about the airline. The Seattle Times and Post-Intelligencer both ran pieces on skybus since it's flying into Bellingham (an hour or so north of here). As far as how well it will do -- Well, most people seem to enjoy it, and the surcharges for baggage etc is not that bad or that different from any other airlines... It seems like it at first, until you realize that the free food you get on regular airlines isn't really food at all (its a pack of peanuts). And the luggage deal is essentially the same scheme as delta, except you have to pay 10 dollars if you bring 2 bags. Any more than two bags, then the scheme is exactly like Delta. And the food thing --- They have yet to throw anyone off for bringing their own food. Also, the prices are pretty much the same as the other airlines, except you don't get that free pack of peanuts =( <--- I know it's horrible... Anyway, the two real downsides of Skybus are the lack of a call center and the lack of connecting flights. But, if you can get through that, it's going to be a helluva money saver. My dad and his wife are flying out to Seattle this winter round trip for something like 90 bucks. Can't beat that.

A "so-so transit system (cota)" --- I take issue with that statement :drunk: It's not so-so; It's the worst damn transit system of the top 30 cities in America. If you work on Sunday night you can't even get home on the bus... It's pathetic. :-D

I think Grandview is probably the best bet (although the housing prices might be going up)... Worthington is a close second; I suppose, though, it all depends on where Bob Evans HQ is. Grandview is an "in-burb" --- It sits just a couple minutes from Downtown, yet is completely isolated from the crap that goes on in the inner city. Not only that, it has a really nice street (grandview ave) with small shops, a local movie theatre, nice restaurants and a couple grocery stores. Upper Arlington is pretty much the same deal, but Grandview is cheaper I think. Grandview has a certain charm to it too (maybe just because I grew up there)... As far as schools go - Grandview doesn't have a huge population, so I imagine the schools would be moderately sized. Worthington has a couple pretty large High Schools I think (maybe only 1 super big one). I know I lived in that area for a little bit when I was in middle school and my middle school had well over 1000 people, so the High School has to have a lot more than that (and that was over 15 years ago - probably grown even more since then). Upper Arlington has a decent school system, but you might have to deal with ridiculously wealthy and snobby kids... =/ Here's some links for grandview- http://www.grandviewheights.org/ And UrbanOhio has a little photo section for Grandview too - http://www.urbanohio.com/GrandviewHeights.htm

I read in the dispatch that the FBI crime statistics were not accurate. Columbus police tacked about 10-15 more homicides on the FBI's numbers. Murder rate wise, Columbus was #7 in the country in 2002 for big cities - TEN WORST LARGE CITIES FOR MURDER, 2002 CITY PER 100,000 (1) Washington, DC 45.8 (2) Detroit 42.0 (3) Baltimore 38.3 (4) Memphis 24.7 (5) Chicago 22.2 (6) Philadelphia 19.0 (7) Columbus 18.1 (8 Milwaukee 18.0 (9) Los Angeles 17.5 (10) Dallas 15.8 The numbers haven't changed too much according to Columbus Police --- The FBI somehow seems to think it's gone down, but I think I would trust local police over some FBI assistant compiling numbers from a "fact" sheet.

This part of the city seriously needs development, but the people saying it will lead to the downfall of polaris or tuttle or something are absolutely right. Maybe though, Columbus could be something of a retail center and get people to come shopping here from other cities (in the region --- unless they fly out for 10 bucks on skybus to shop lol)...

I'm sorry, maybe I was unclear - I did not mean to say that zoos with a lot of history treat animals poorly. I thought I expressed that the qualities usually associated with older urban zoos are not necessarily conducive to treating the animals well - e.g. smaller area to work with, more pollution, and a lot of infrastructure that was used when zoos used to show the animals as if they were in jail cells. I did state standards have come up a lot, and I'm not insinuating that older zoos continue to practice the 'jailed animal' viewing style - just that I wouldn't necessarily be basing a zoo's stature on its history considering the deplorable living conditions of the past. This is all void though, because all I was suggesting was the layout for an optimal zoo. You seemed to have taken it as a direct front against anything urban. I think we could all agree that if animal welfare was the pinnacle of a zoo's mission, then an urban environment most likely would not be the best suitor. And that was all I was suggesting. Well that along with the number of species present ratio to space. But I also never said an urban zoo couldn't be well suited for the animals it houses. It absolutely could, and I believe there are quite a few out there; just it's much harder to make it ideal with the constraints of being in the middle of an urban center. Of course zoos are based around attracting visitors, to obtain capital to further whatever their mission may be, and in being they have to have touristy type attractions. I don't recall ever mentioning anything against it being touristy. Museum-like? I would hope not for the animals sake, as that would be somewhat of a regression to the days of viewing cells. If you would like links to citations of older zoos (and the dominant style used in turn of the century and later zoos) usually not having the best facilities for the animals, then I suppose I will have to oblige: Zoo History - Discovery Magazine - http://www.helpelephants.com/feature_070523.html Hope that will do for now -

Just wanted to comment on some of the comments from last year - People were getting into the argument about who has more species etc... And the architecture of the zoo - A point to be made is that a zoo with more space and less animals seems to be optimal; that is if anyone is thinking of the welfare of the animals housed there. Many of the older zoos are constrained by space and yet want to attract more visitors by adding more attractions. This could easily lead to depressed living conditions for the animals. Also, older zoos in general aren't necessarily known for their benign living conditions. Standards have come up a lot, but I don't know that I would base a zoo's stature on how old it is or the proximity to an urban area. In fact I find it hard to believe anyone would think that an optimal zoo would be anywhere other than in the middle of nowhere. None of Ohio's zoos (or any major American Zoo that I know of) would fit that bill, except maybe the Wilds - never been there though. The architecture argument is nice and all (yeah I like pretty looking buildings and structures too), but it still seems to miss the whole point of the zoo - the animals. It seems that the architecture should center around not being noticed, rather blending in to the environment trying to be portrayed in the exhibit. All that said, the Columbus Zoo is in a fantastic location, but still not even close to being rural. It's in (I think) the fastest growing county in Ohio (Delaware), and in the fastest growing section of metropolitan Columbus. Fortunately the zoo did buy the land around them so that they could (hopefully) make the environments more closely resemble the natural habitats of the animals housed. And the river right next to it is great. I loved the boat rides as a kid. That's all -

I understand the neutral ground standpoint, but the Nationals certainly won't do. There is no draw there. No feel for the team. Nothing - At least with the Yankees there were amazing players constantly going through Columbus. It had a draw. Also, though I understand the point about keeping Columbus neutral, I asked myself why exactly Columbus had to be neutral. I can't really come up with a good reason. Maybe so that the split fan base in Columbus wouldn't turn one way or the other, but I can only envision it hurting cincinnati, not cleveland. Cleveland has a pretty large population base and fan base in place. I don't think Columbus fans will make too much of a difference and it certainly won't take away the Cleveland fans already in place. The reds, though, could use a boost. (Not to mention I love the Reds =) Really I just think it would be pretty great to have either farm team right in the middle of the two cities. An Ohio team with an Ohio AAA team, now that's baseball done right!