jonoh81

I still don't like the setbacks. Unless there are patios with seating or something where people can actually spend time and interact at the street/sidewalk level, it's just a waste of space.

The stray cat problem would've been horrendous.

I guess this is RiverSouth sort of? 145 S. Front Street. Project Description: The Civic Redevelopment of the Ohio Child and Family Services building from an office building to a mixed use development type with office, restaurant, patio, residential, amenity deck, and structured below grade parking. A new curb cut is proposed on Civic Center Drive. Everything but the curb cut sounds good.

There's no layout, but if anything, the number of non-school units seems kind of low to me. I would imagine that the 2 new buildings would go on the southern part of the site south of the school, but that would still leave quite a bit of space. It would be nice to see some kind of sidewalk-fronting townhomes or something along Brehl Avenue behind the school building, but I suspect a lot of that is going to be left for parking. Without seeing the plan, it's hard to say.

Another project I didn't see mentioned here... Project Description: 308 Carpenter Street This is a new construction, multi-family, three-story building located at 308 Carpenter Street in the Old Towne East neighborhood. The total site encompasses approximately 0.2 acres which currently lies on four parcels. The total building square footage is 6,743 SF which includes 8 living units. Nine parking spaces are located on a parking lot adjacent to the building. The construction type is VB. There is a stair in an open breezeway that connects the units.

There may be an update to this... seems a lot bigger. Project Description: 921-945 Parsons This is a four-story mixed-use building located on three parcels at 921-945 Parsons Avenue. The lower level will have a fresh market that will replace the current All People’s Fresh Market currently located on the site. Tenant space 1 is currently TBD but may be house “Bikes for All People”, which is currently located across the street. The upper stories will have 43 residential units, a fitness room, and a fourth-floor amenity deck.

I didn't see this here... for the former Starling Middle School at 120 S. Central Avenue. Project Description: Starling Yard The project includes the construction of 2 multi-family buildings (52 total units) and adaptive reuse of the existing school building (45 units). Also, a parking lot, associated entry drives, underground detention, and utilities.

Saw this for 1219 E. Rich Street on the Columbus Portal. Project Description: Rich & Wilson Townhomes New construction of 8 units in 2 buildings with parking on-site in the Olde Towne East neighborhood.

We don't have to, they've done that to themselves. If your own family hates you, there's probably a good reason. Mandel has a very long history to back up what an awful person he is. And the guy that had an ad that appealed to white nationalism by starting it out with "Do you hate Mexicans?" is really not anymore deserving. Those aren't mere policy disagreements at play. They are trash. I couldn't care less about their supposed dignity.

JD Vance is an opportunist. He has never struck me as a true MAGA believer, just someone who will say and do whatever it takes to win. In some ways, I think that's why Trump endorsed him over the vile creature that is Mandel. I really don't know how it plays out against Ryan. As for Dewine against Whaley... also who knows. Dewine is despised by the MAGA crowd, but he's still a Republican and will be running against a woman. Sexism will probably trump any policy disagreements for them, but there may be some suppressed turnout on the Republican side. The only good news today is that it seems the most extreme candidates lost, including on the Democratic side. Cranley sucks and I'm glad he lost. He couldn't even pull out a win in Cincinnati.

Technically, all the areas in question did lose residents between the mid-late 20th Century. Clintonville certainly did. But what took place in other neighborhoods did not happen there: the losses weren't replaced by people of any other demographics because the neighborhoods never really got that much less expensive. I suspect some of this has to do with the way public dollars were being allocated.

There are 2 main types of exclusion going on- economic and racial- though there is overlap. The neighborhoods that see the most successful infrastructure and project forced cancelations tend to be overwhelmingly made up of upper middle class and they overwhelmingly lack diversity, and they are usually demographically stagnant. Clintonville, German Village, GH, etc. all fall into those descriptors. The only way that's going to change is through zoning, which will remove a good portion- though not nearly all- of the excuses used to block projects. Beyond that, like I said, I don't know why the city keeps kowtowing to every Karen with an opinion. Good urbanity is not based on popular opinion, but decades of established results.

Couldn't agree more. It's all just paying people a bunch of money for constant intellectual masturbation on things we all know and understand need to happen. Columbus loves paying people to study things, only to immediately shelve the results and begin another study a year or two later. Look no further than every transit study since 1980. And yes, the "complete streets" thing in the city has been a joke. The Indianola drama is a prime example. The facts overwhelmingly support that bike lanes don't harm businesses- and usually help them, but the city is considering a less ideal plan just because some people think it will harm the neighborhood. Those people objecting to them are wrong. Just build the bike lanes instead of worrying about parking or what another Clintonville Karen thinks, for god's sake. Good, successful urbanity should not be stopped by ignorant people who don't know what they're talking about. There will always be objections to change, but the city really needs to start letting the facts and evidence dictate planning rather than the tiny, but very vocal minority that shows up to public input meetings.

I sure wish we lived in a world where people took like 5 minutes to understand how inflation and energy prices work. Or really any global issue of any kind. What a better world that might be.

Maybe, but we might be giving them too much credit. After all, aren't they the same people who didn't bother to make sure developers built what they were actually proposing with the materials they were supposed to use? Or how they've repeatedly ignored their own development recommendations when it came to High Street? They've been less than stellar at consistently pushing better urbanity Downtown.

Yeah, but that's always one of the argument for a demolition, whether it's really true or not.

The City created some precedent by allowing the Main Bar to be demolished for a surface lot without any development plan in place. Their inconsistency is a problem.

Don't think it goes here, but... More of an increased density project than strictly infill considering it's just using the backyards of existing buildings. 580 E. Rich Street https://columbusohdev.app.box.com/s/zgmlk42mn980mb0jqxm2sd6t1jv0zzz8/file/945822118460

The 315 underpasses through Franklinton have always been pretty disgusting. I doubt this covers that, though.

Because public input seemed to at least put pressure on the Neil Avenue proposal- even if they didn't work it out- I encourage anyone with comments about this to contact Health Homes directly through their website at https://www.nationwidechildrens.org/about-us/population-health-and-wellness/healthy-neighborhoods-healthy-families/affordable-housing and through email at [email protected] This is a ridiculous reason to tear down a perfectly good building, especially with the entire site's given space. My message: I just had a few comments on the proposed project at 255 Reeb Avenue. While I fully support the Healthy Homes initiative, this seems like a poorly considered project. The existing building is in reasonable condition, and while it may not be able to offer the larger units your organization prefers, a historic building like this should not be sacrificed solely because it doesn’t strictly adhere to existing plans, especially when there are alternatives. Columbus has lost too many of these buildings as it is. Furthermore, it seems like the greater site includes the vacant lots immediately to the west, as well as the land back to the rear alley. Is there any reason why you could not fit 2-4 multi-unit structures there (or 1 large one) with the desired 2-3 bedroom units while incorporating the existing building into the project in some way? If not for residential units, it could make a great little community center of some sort. This whole neighborhood is on the rise, and with the trajectory of Greater Columbus, we should be working to both preserve our history and build the type of density necessary to sustain it.

Hey, preaching to the choir. I've been advocating every project be maximized in height/density for years. And we will get more density and larger projects long-term from all this, but I can only imagine the enormous sprawl that will also be built between Columbus and Newark. I have no real hope of a cohesive regional plan coming out of this. It's going to mostly be a free-for-all for developers to see who can put up the most cul-de-sacs on former greenfields.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3c_pJ_CLJQ

The only thing that's going to change anything is demographics. Republicans aren't changing for the better anytime soon, and will simply make excuses if Intel pulls out. Not a Disney (company) fan, but look how Florida is threatening them now with Disney barely expressing modest concern about their version of the bill. And we've also seen how far corporate pullouts and stuff go. Look at what happened in Georgia, and how it didn't really change anything. Republicans pull this gross crap because they believe they can get away with it, and more often than not, they've been correct. The general public is filled with people who support this.

The problem with bills like this is that their existance makes the public assume that schools are teaching sex and sexuality to 1st graders when it's not happening, just as the public now seems to believe that CRT was a widespread class in most public schools when it was taught virtually nowhere outside of being somewhat of a generic framework in some college courses. As you said, people don't know what's in these bills. They don't read them. They just hear about it and think "Wow, I can't believe schools are teaching toddlers sex. Thank god Ohio's addressing this" when none of that was ever happening. Furthermore, the wording of the bills are problematic from the standpoint of who they target. Legislatures could've made the language all-encompassing and neutral, such as "Discussion of an explicit sexual nature is not permitted", but they didn't. They specified dicussions on gender identity and sexual orientation. Since heterosexuals don't really worry about or discuss either of those in the context of their own lives- because they don't have to- it was pretty obvious that it was about LGBTQ and not a neutral ban. Which makes the whole thing intentionally discriminatory on multiple fronts. So not only are the bills a waste of everyone's time and taxpayer dollars, they further divide the public and further stigmatize non-cis, non-straight demographics all for the sake of riling up the base.

I'm rooting for the opposite, for more companies like Intel to come to the state and start putting pressure on the legislature to tone down the BS. Also, it would help pull in younger workers from other places. Rural counties are dying. They're too old, they don't have economic opportunities, etc., so the more potential young, diverse voters the state gets, the better long term. The state will just continue down this gross path otherwise.