jonoh81

Only about 42% of paper is recycled.

The bus lane is also not separated in that rendering. Different paint colors are not separation.

Maybe, but the article makes it seem like it's a requirement for the conversion into residential rather than a monetary issue.

Why would they need to cover up the pool for this to become residential? Couldn't that be some kind of amenity if it was made usable?

It looks decent. I might take a boat out to see it sometime.

We should all dislike lying and intentionally trying to misinform the public. Have a little shame.

I tend to agree, but this language is far more egregious than even the proposed language for the abortion amendment last year. It's outright fearmongering.

This is the language hack LaRose went with for the anti-gerrymandering amendment. Just blatantly lying. Ohio Republicans are absolute trash and I hope they are forced to change this. The proposed amendment would: Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018, and eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts." Establish a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to manipulate the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts to favor the two largest political parties in the state of Ohio https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/08/15/redistricting-issue-backers-draft-ballot-language-would-rig-election/74718586007/

Arshot is an embarrassment. Hopefully, it never happens and they'll finally sell the damn site like they should've done 10 years ago.

https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2024/08/08/citizens-not-politicians-left-wing-jim-renacci-maureen-oconnor/74710455007/ You really love to see Republicans melting down because they know this is getting passed and they are going to lose their stranglehold on state government.

Have property values plummeted yet?

I hope the "max" in that case does get pushed, because High can definitely handle more than that. I do think the height standards are a little too conservative across the board for my liking.

I would expect nothing less from MAGAs than to blame immigrants for a housing crisis they didn't create and is occurring everywhere regardless of the places having an influx of immigrants or not. Let's keep in mind that Springfield hasn't built any net housing at all in years. Springfield had an estimated 27,778 housing units in 2022. In 2010, it had 28,437. Estimates, of course, are not exact counts, but they are usually fairly close and tend to at least show trends. These numbers suggest Springfield actually lost 700 units over the course of 12 years. Probably not that surprising considering the demolitions for the hospital project and just general vacant property demolition. Springfield has between several hundred to a few thousand vacant properties as we speak, as well. What's the city doing to fill them? Did the migrants cause this? No. Did poor leadership fail to address local housing concerns long before this? Yes. Are they engaging in white nationalist fearmongering trash? Absolutely.

It's not the worst proposal, but I agree with you about rebuilding the street grid here.

What a shocker. Suburban thinking wins again.

Specifically, what are Moreno's policies that you think would be good for Ohio, and specifically, what policies that Brown has supported do you disagree with?

If the Dirty Frank's building and the others could be restored to their original brick look, that would definitely be my preference as well, but I'm not sure how possible that is because the buildings look totally stripped of anything resembling an architectural feature. I'm pretty much always for preservation and adaptive reuse, and I think that's certainly doable for this project if there is any will for it. I doubt there is any real pushback from the commission, though, in either preservation or design.

So is the Little Palace building staying? That's the only one of those I would actually care about saving because unlike the others, it hasn't been stripped of every detail. Edit: Nevermind, I didn't look at the new renderings. I also like the increased height and density, but the first proposal was far more interesting architecurally. This is pretty boring and I hope it gets revised back more towards the original.

Making it harder to drive in the city is a good thing, IMO. It will encourage walking, biking and transit, and if fewer people drive, or drive more slowly, that means increased safety for everyone, including drivers themselves. And if we have fewer people in the city who want Columbus to be a suburban neighborhood, even better.

Long overdue! It was kind of annoying trying to find news about each block of downtown across multiple threads. Thanks!

Which could mean a lot of different things. It could also mean that the sales team is bad or not being aggressive enough in renting it out. I could mean that the space itself is poorly designed for most potential customers. It could mean that the owners are looking for a specific type of renter they haven't found yet. It could mean that the price they want for the space is not competitive with the market. We shouldn't assume that it's vacant specifically because no one wants any retail space in that area.

Maybe you could say that for the Gay Street stuff, but by the time Long was developed, Downtown had been seeing successful residential development for the better part of 20 years. To have no restaurant/retail space at all on a major street Downtown is just bad. I get the argument of a few residential-only streets, but not there. It's almost as dead there as the Front Street parking garage wall.

I still basically am. I like some elements of it, but it's all too undersized IMO. People act like human scale development either has to be 2-3 stories or that larger projects can't have any, but that's just a failure of imagination. I like, for example, the Gay Street townhomes. They look good and they have nice street interaction, but for my money, I would've liked to see them backing much more significant developmet that brought in more pedestrianization, retail space and a much higher number of units. It's mostly just a single-use development that has very little street interaction outside of people walking in and out of their buildings. This is particularly egregious on Long Street, where you have these new larger buildings, but zero restaurants, cafes, retail or anything for people to walk to.

Developments such as a new fast-food outlet should be banned on High, and it's sad it's much easier for this crap to be approved than some of the major developments the area commission has tried so hard to kill- or in some cases successfully killed.

Not unexpected, but still stupid. Well, on to City Council, I hope.