jonoh81

Dredging partially failed because the low head dam at Main kept backing up all the silt. Now that it's gone, silt refill isn't as bad, but the river is also shallower now.

I don't think the argument is that wealthy people don't use transit, but that they're less likely to use transit. However, if you're going to attract more people who want to give up driving, you have to give them a convenient, safe, nearby system that makes giving up the car worth it to them. Car culture has been pounded into Americans for more than a century, so it's always an uphill battle.

I think that's more an argument about the choice of route. Clearly as a first route in a new system, it leaves something to be desired from a few standpoints.

Studies show that, in general, people will only walk 1/4 mile or less to a bus stop, and up to a 1/2 mile for a train station. Those distances can vary a little depending on route conditions and the quality of the stations, but for the most part, these are the maximum distances people will travel. It is not just that fewer stations at greater distances mean fewer people who live along the route will walk to a station, but fewer people overall will even have that option. The ORR route census tracts contain roughly 47,500 people, but less than half live within a 1/4 mile of a proposed station. You also have to build infrastructure not just for what exists, but also plan for an expected future. It's more difficult- and more expensive- to go back and add stuff later than it is to build it all initially. Furthermore, as I said, transit systems get absolutely no benefit of the doubt from the public the way roads do. A route has to basically be immediately successful with plentiful ridership. If it isn't, it will threaten the future of all other potential lines.

Speaking of the Olentangy BRT route, has anyone really looked at the station placement? There are 15 proposed stations across 14 legs from Downtown to Bethel Road in the first phase, and just a single leg actually meets standard BRT station distance separation, which is roughly 1/4-1/3 mile in urban areas an up to 1/2 mile in more suburban areas. The other 13 are all way too far apart, some up to 3x further than the standard. Since the success of transit systems is judged in the first year or so, I worry that by placing the stations so far apart, ridership won't be nearly as high as it could be, meaning the political will to expand the line or add stations later decreases greatly. There is no reason to have some stations 1 1/2 miles apart. How is that convenient? One of the reasons the CMAX was a failure in terms of being BRT is also because stations were too far apart, among other problems. I get the feeling the city associates station placement distance as the main driver of route speed, but in the process, they are sacrificing easy usage. If people have to walk further to get to a station, the advantages of a faster bus are immediately lost. The speed is gained through dedicated lanes and signal priority, not just having fewer stations further apart.

Yes. Everyone really just thinks of Somalis, but other African/ME nations with significant Muslim populations provide thousands of immigrants to the city. All of the following nations had at least 1,000 immigrants in Columbus- Ghana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Morrocco, Sierra Leone, Iraq, Nigeria, Liberia and Cameroon. These are the ones with at least 500- Eritrea, Senegal, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Bangladesh, and Iran. There are several more nations with at least 100. In 2019, outside of Somalia, there were about 29,000 immigrants altogether from such nations just within the city limits. Outside of South and SE Asia, they are the fastest-growing immigrant group.

The Afghan refugees won't necessarily end up moving to other states, or that Afghans resettled in other states won't end up in Ohio. It will depend largely on familial/cultural connections or employment. If there is family or at least some number of people with similar nationality or culture, they are likely to stay in Ohio. Columbus got its massive Bhutanese population not from them being resettled there, but later moving there because they knew people. Same with many Somalis who weren't originally resettled in Columbus. Most immigrant groups work this way, really. When you go to a new country, at least the first generation likes to be around people and culture that is familiar, and by the 2nd-3rd generations, the connections with the location are well-established and so remain permanently.

It's quite the downgrade to go from like 10 buildings above 7 stories with 1 at least 30 stories to 3 low-rise buildings that won't even be built at the same time. This feels like a bait and switch of the worst kind to me. I'm doubting the developer ever even had the resources to build what was originally proposed. Next downgrade will be a surface parking lot with some planters, with the commission telling them to "get creative" with the choice of plants.

I'm not. The Downtown area isn't their personal playground in which they get to dictate development because it might impact their view. In a neighborhood like this, as you said, the risk is always there that the view changes when more buildings go up. They were never guaranteed a permanent private vista.

It'll be 5 stories all said and done by the time they finish accommodating every dumb request. They shouldn't even be worrying about parking at all- they'll still be able to rent out the units either way. And the idea of changing an entire building's design simply to avoid blocking a bit of direct sun on a neighboring building in a downtown area is so absolutely asinine. Where do these people think they live? I don't know if I'm more annoyed and exhausted with the inanity of the objections, or all the developers bending over backwards to listen to them.

OSU is a lot like Nationwide... they stick to what they know in terms of development and design most of the time, outside of the hospital towers. If those sites get developed, I would expect something along the line of a brick/glass 4-7 story building.

I think either earlier this year or sometime last year, they requested and got approval for zoning heights up to 200'. Depending on floor heights, that could be 20-25 stories, assuming no variances for something even taller. I'm not sure they would go to the trouble of getting that if they didn't intend to use it at some point.

Maybe they're saving the big residential push for the rumored skyscapers?

So it's going to be a corporate office park at 33 and 270?

Thanks Obama.

Austin looks like Miami Beach mixed with Communist housing.

It's things like this that make me seriously doubt any substantial zoning changes will take place when the new stuff comes out. They're still willing to tear down perfectly good historic buildings for a parking lot. They have no real vision.

Let's just hope this doesn't end up reduced to 5 stories.

What about the current state of the market suggests that they couldn't fill the units? Record population growth combined with record low housing inventory would seem to support the exact opposite. The only potential issue I can think of is that they're not able to secure financing for the larger project, but even that would be kind of curious in the current market.

I don't get it. The height reduction aside, it reduces the number of units by 70 from the earlier proposal. Why? I guess I missed seeing the news that the massive housing shortage is now over. Good to know.

Aesthetics aside, it's no secret I'm in favor of getting as much density into a site as possible. 5 stories is not a skyscraper. I don't really get the freakouts some have about these low-rise developments in residential areas. On Parsons itself, there is no reason we can't go even higher than that. It's one of the main corridors on the South Side. I'm all for spiting the whale watchers so long as it's with a decent project.

It's disappointing to me how many times per year does someone has to write something along the lines of "there are plenty of other sites for dense development" when a dense development fall through, particularly because of NIMBYism. It's just pushing things down the line in hopes that the next project ends up being better when there are no guarantees. Every project that doesn't push the envelope is a wasted opportunity for increasing density- and all the amenities that come with it.

It’s going to be built by the time the dumb lawsuit goes anywhere.

https://portal.columbus.gov/Permits/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Engineering&TabName=Engineering&capID1=21ARY&capID2=00000&capID3=00490&agencyCode=COLUMBUS&IsToShowInspection= Not a lot of details, but a project called Harriet's Hope is proposed for 1551 W. Broad Street. It's supposed to be 3 stories and have 52 units. It's set to replace the existing abandoned hotel building set well off Broad. https://portal.columbus.gov/Permits/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Engineerig&TabName=Engineering&capID1=21LAC&capID2=00000&capID3=00810&agencyCode=COLUMBUS&IsToShowInspection= Also, a church at 89 Avondale may be renovated into some kind of high school.

I read about this earlier and was wondering if that was responsible for the closing. Gotta pay those legal bills.