cbussoccer

The new angle from the back side of the building looks really nice. This is going to be an awesome addition to our skyline.

They could always make it half as wide but twice as tall ? lol

From the article: The biggest expected concern from residents is the potential for the proposed office building to block views to the south. Wagenbrenner said they worked to preserve what he called the “meaty part of the Downtown view” by stepping down the height of the western portion of the building.

Finally some height!

I've always been surprised that this surface lot at the corner of Gay and Third has not been developed. This seems like such a prime spot for mid/high-rise mixed-use building given it's location on Gay Street near numerous restaurants, it's proximity to both High and Broad, and it's location on Third allowing for a very easy trip into and out of downtown. I wonder if we could see this lot developed in the not too distant future.

Their table doesn't make sense to me. It has a column titled 'Available SF' which is populated, but then they have a column titled 'Available' which is completely blank. The 'Rate' and 'Lease Type' columns are also blank. We can probably assume all of the space is available, but chart is a bit confusing.

Columbus, Franklin County to back roughly half of debt to expand Hilton Downtown https://www.dispatch.com/news/20190403/columbus-franklin-county-to-back-roughly-half-of-debt-to-expand-hilton-downtown According to the article, they still plan to break ground some time this summer.

Ah, ok. I thought this was the property Pizzuti bought but wasn't sure. Hopefully they have something in the works.

Are there already development plans for this spot?

From the article: "Plans call for a 5,000-square-foot two-floor restaurant and 16 apartments wrapping around the 260-space parking garage." It's being built at 36-40 E. Lincoln St. Sometimes on CBF if you stop the page from loading quick enough you can read the article ?

Again, let's get back to talking about Franklinton development. This discussion should probably be shifted to a transit thread.

My initial question clearly stated that my assumption was a true BRT line would be implemented. As I've stated, CMAX is not a BRT line. Along that same line of thought, we can't guarantee a streetcar line will be properly implemented. This is beside the point though. I simply wanted to have a discussion about the merits of a properly implemented BRT line and a properly implemented streetcar line along Broad Street in Columbus. Unfortunately, we cannot seem to remain on that specific topic. Oh well, let's get this thread back to Franklinton developments.

And half the amount of time it took to build the 8-story LC Riversouth building lol

CMAX is not BRT so, quite frankly, that's not an argument that can be made. CMAX is just a regular bus line with a lot of additional branding and slightly fancier bus stops. CMAX has very little built up infrastructure compared to a true BRT line with protected lanes, stations with fare gates, ROWs, etc. There are many BRT systems that have the same amenities as subways and other rail lines. Just because it's a bus rather than a train doesn't mean you can't build similar stations. We aren't even talking about a subway line though, so I'm not sure why this is being brought up. We are talking specifically about a streetcar on Broad Street vs a true BRT line on Broad Street.

This doesn't address any of points. I simply want to know how a light rail line brings enough additional value in comparison to a legit BRT line to justify the much higher cost. Saying "the Columbus mindset won't implement a real BRT line" doesn't answer any of my questions. Heck, by that logic, who is to say the "Columbus mindset" won't totally screw up a light rail line similar to what has happened in Cincinnati. I want to see proof that a real BRT line is not part of the "real stuff", is "weaker", and is "fake innovation". I think this is an important conversation to have because if we can implement a transit line that accomplish what the ideal light rail line would accomplish at half the cost, why wouldn't we do that? However, if light rail truly is the best bang for your buck, we certainly need to go that route.

OK, but we are talking BRT lines, not regular bus lines. Of course regular bus lines can move often. It costs very little to do so. You just spend some man hours to determine your new route, then spend some man hours to remove the old bus stop signs and place the new ones and you are done. With a BRT line, you considerably more infrastructure built up that is specific for the BRT line which would need to be removed if the line needed to move. Additionally, on a road like Broad St. in Columbus, you won't be moving a bus line any time soon. It's the main East-West road running through downtown and it has been that way for 100+ years. Look, I'm all for rail transit. I think commuter rails coming in from Lancaster, Marysville, Delaware, etc. would do wonders for the city. I'm simply skeptical of the cost of implementing a light rail system. I would love to see some studies that have been done on the matter though. I see a lot of people suggest things such as what you've suggested, but I rarely see the statements being backed up. That's not a dig at you either, just an observation of mine based on the conversations I've had.

To your point about passengers, most cities similar in size to Columbus that have streetcars (Cincy, KC, etc.) do not have streetcars that are much larger than an extended bus similar to Cleveland's Health Line. Is the extra millions of dollars really worth it for just a small increase in capacity? To your point about development, how exactly does a light rail rail line spark development at a level that a BRT line could not? They both serve the exact same function, but one is on wheels and the other is on a rail. Do you know of any actual studies that have been done which prove the difference in effectiveness? I'm trying to be snarky at all, I'm genuinely curious. I've thought a lot about this and I've really struggled to understand how light rail is a better option than a true BRT system when factoring in the cost of implementation and upkeep for both. If both systems yield the same/similar results, I would hate for Columbus to sink millions and millions dollars into one light rail line that could have been used to implement two or three BRT lines. All that being said, Broad Street desperately needs one of the two options.

Somebody help me understand (and I know this is probably better suited for a different thread), how is light rail any better than an actual BRT line. It seems to me that the cost of constructing a light rail line far exceeds the cost of a BRT line (with true bus designated/protected lanes and the whole 9 yards) without providing much additional value. Commuter rail or actual subway/elevated lines obviously far exceeds anything a BRT line could do, but I'm struggling to see the value light rail brings that BRT cannot provide.

That building really seems to mesh with the neighborhood well. I know it's not finished yet, but so far it looks like they've done an excellent job.

I just noticed that today too. No submission yet for a crane though. Can't wait for this project to start going up though, and hopefully the second phase of this will end up happening as well.

I was speaking specifically about the building itself. It matches the rendering pretty perfectly.

^ It looks pretty much exactly like that rendering...

Joe Nardone, CEO of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority, is working on adding some additional nonstop flights to Columbus. Domestically, San Diego tops his list as there are 116 passengers traveling there from Columbus each day. Also on his list are Austin (80 passengers daily), San Antonio (76 passengers daily), and Kansas City (73 passengers daily). Internationally, Tokyo, London, and Paris are the main goals. Tokyo is currently the number one international destination from Columbus with an average of 47 passengers each day. London also sees 37 daily passengers and Paris sees 17. https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/03/20/air-service-wish-list-there-are-the-flights.html If we end up adding all 4 domestic cities he listed, we will have daily direct flights to almost every major US city. The only ones missing, that I can think of, would be Portland, New Orleans (I think we have a weekly flight on Southwest), and Sacramento. I also think Windsor Locks could be addition. Internationally, adding any one of those cities would obviously be huge. Paris or London would probably be more popular for vacationers, but Tokyo would definitely get a ton of use by business travelers and Asian students traveling back home. There would obviously be some tourism use for Tokyo, but London and Paris would definitely see more of that.

In Columbus Southwest has once weekly flights to New Orleans and Oakland. It's definitely an odd schedule and I can't figure out a reason for it.

^ Groundbreaking in August according to the article. There's also a pretty nice video with the renderings: