jonoh81

Yeah, the Sun Belt cities are notoriously bad with sprawl. And I had to laugh at the suggestion that even 3.5 units an acre was somehow the gold standard. Certainly better than 1, but that's a heck of a low bar. But yeah, I don't want Columbus to be like a Texas city. Those big boulevards may be preparing for development, which is good, but they're not preparing for urban development. They're just preparing for more sprawl. A unified code for the Columbus region would be awesome, but it will be a cold day in Hell before places like Delaware County agree to something like that. Changing those attitudes will take a concerted effort, but in the meantime, developers and anti-sprawl interests should put much more of their focus on areas of the region that are already much more receptive to density. This idea that we can force Delaware County to stop loving sprawl is a waste of time. Focus on areas that can be densified right now, and that alone will help increase construction. Columbus itself has large areas with no development at all, or where much of it is low density. If I were these people, I would spend much more time trying to get Columbus leaders on board with consistent and upgraded zoning citywide. The usual suspect neighborhoods (Clintonville, etc) will fight that, but with a million people coming in the next few decades, there will not be any shortage of people willing to live in far more dense neighborhoods even if some of the old busybodies leave for the Powells and New Albanys.

I was able to read it, but my point stands. Why are they focusing on the outer areas to begin with? Say what you want about Franklin County issues regarding development, but I guarantee that there are going to be less restrictions within the city itself than in Powell or Delaware where zoning is even less friendly to density. And the fact that Crawford Hoying is complaining about not being able to build density is rich. They reduced their South High project Downtown by 50% and increased parking because they claimed they couldn't afford the larger project, but then go on to say that increased density helps offset costs. Some of these guys are talking out both sides of their butts. They claim they want to build dense, urban-style development, but still build out in the exurbs and still get away with building low-density projects in the heart of the city. My point is that the issue isn't just zoning or short-sighted commissions. It's that developers in Central Ohio are also not all that willing to do what it takes, either.

It's a little disingenuous to me to see developers say things like this... as they are building way out in the exurbs. Just because a handful of them are building "town center" developments with smaller lots in a few places doesn't mean their developments aren't sprawl. They're still gobbling up green fields on the far fringes and in other suburban counties, and for every token "community", most of their portfolios are still filled with traditional, large lot, single-family, non-grid, low density sprawl. I know part of the issue is that development commissions and local zoning out in the burbs work against much else, but they're not exactly being the change they claim they seek. If their focus is in Delaware County, they're already getting it wrong.

I don't recall, but if so, that's crazy. It's a landlocked suburb that has limited space for development. Would Grandview really say no to a few variances to get a few more floors minimum?

And yet they don't go any denser than 4 stories. There is a direct disconnect to what they say about demand and what they're willing to build to meet it.

I think that was just to prevent sewer backups from draining directly into the Scioto River, and it was EPA mandated, not really something Columbus leadership pushed for on their own. This project didn't really do anything to change the situation in most neighborhoods.

I've always heard that Austin has horrible NIMBYism, seemingly to a much worse degree than Columbus. That seems to be the biggest issue with their development. I haven't heard too much about infrastructure problems except for traffic. Despite those issues, though, they get so much more development than Columbus. Admittedly, the region has been growing faster than Columbus, but actual city growth is much more comparable to Columbus, especially in the last 5 years or so.

I know we're getting OT here, but that development plan on Henderson and Olentangy RR had to be pulled back in part because of a concern that local sewers couldn't handle the additional load. I remember that being an issue in Clintonville with the Indianola projects, too. Infrastructure upgrades, from sewers to transit, have to be a greater priority around Columbus moving forward. This issue may not apply Downtown as much, but I'm sure we all want density beyond just Downtown.

I admittedly do complain about projects a lot, but I think for good reason. The BF article just reinforces some of the obvious problems I and others have been talking about over the years- the city is not preparing well enough for a significant population increase. The individual project complaints are easy targets, but the issues are deeper than that and I don't think it helps anything to gloss over them. I love Columbus and it is a great city. That reality doesn't mean there are no areas where it can't and shouldn't improve.

$60 million seems very high for a renovation, even for 3 buildings, so it's no wonder it's been sitting dormant for so long.

There was just an article on Business First today talking about how both Columbus and surrounding cities are pushing against development now because none of them have bothered to prepare infrastructure or zoning for current and future growth. Seems Columbus does indeed share some of the responsibility for underwhelming development. Yes, there is lots of development, but compared to regional and national peers, Columbus is actually behind almost all of them in terms of the number of projects and housing units being added. The anti-density, anti-transit, anti-development attitudes are going to hurt the city sooner or later, including significant increases in housing costs and traffic. I really don't like the attitude that you should only be happy with the city. There are problems and they should be discussed.

First look! J/K... it will almost definitely not be a highrise. 3 acres is a fairly big site, so I'd expect at least a few separate buildings all 10 stories or less with a chunk of the site being taken up by a standard, single-use parking garage. Hope I'm wrong.

Tried every solution that I could find and tried 4 different browsers and 3 computers. It's the only site that I can't access.

My exact error is the old There was a temporary DNS error. Try refreshing the page. Error Code: INET_E_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND I did all the tricks to try to fix it and nothing. It's only this website.

I'm not even getting that message. Just getting a "page not found" error.

I didn't really know where to ask this, but is anyone else having trouble accessing the Franklin County government portal? I go there often, especially for the auditor site, and it just shows it being down for at least the last week. I know it's not me because I've tried multiple browsers and even different computers. I looked for any news about this and wasn't able to find anything, either.

I expect that the Chipotle lots will be similar to the rest of the AD, so we're already probably going to get more of the same. I just want to see some variety.

CV is part of the AD, but the railroad tracks mark a clear separation, so it's a chance to do something different there. There's nothing wrong with brick, but I don't understand the desire for conformity in every development. This is not a historical neighborhood, it's a blank slate. There is no reason to keep doing the same thing over and over again.

The fact that NRI was pushing to have all of Confluence Village be the same brick box design as the rest of the AD strongly suggests they have no interest to branch out architecturally in the neighborhood. I suspect that last plot is going to have something underwhelming.

If true, that would be awesome news. It would seem that the actual buildings would front the streets, including Broad and Georgesville, which would be a huge departure from the existing area. I'm curious what the large grey areas are along the top. Plazas? It would also appear this plan demolishes pretty much everything- the mall itself, out buildings, the strip mall behind it and at the corner of Georgesville/Broad, etc. Overall, it actually has a lot of elements from my own map from like 5-6 years ago.

I wouldn't want to be just another "booster bro".

I am talking about all African foreign-born, not just from Somalia, and only for the city. Minneapolis is still higher at the metro level. At the metro level, Columbus was 3rd in the Midwest for African foreign-born, but only about 300 behind Chicago and growing significantly faster than either other metro.

Here are some Midwest comparisons for Foreign-born from Africa, City Only 2000--------------------------------------2018 1. Minneapolis: 12,765--------1. Columbus: 45,092 2. Chicago: 12,613---------------2. Minneapolis: 26,271 3. Columbus: 9,530--------------3. Chicago: 25,573 4. St. Paul: 4,697------------------4. Indianapolis: 14,965 5. Detroit: 3,249-------------------5. St. Paul: 13,594 6. Indianapolis: 2,650-----------6. Kansas City: 8,558 7. Kansas City: 2,192-----------7. Cincinnati: 7,113 8. Cincinnati: 1,781--------------8. Des Moines: 6,191 9. St. Louis: 1,500----------------9. Omaha: 5,474 10. Omaha: 1,497----------------10. Grand Rapids: 3,932 11. Milwaukee: 1,332-----------11. St. Louis: 3,777 12. Cleveland: 1,075-------------12. Milwaukee: 3,552 13. Des Moines: 1,038----------13. Lincoln: 2,942 14. Madison: 991-----------------14. Wichita: 2,752 15. Wichita: 946-------------------15. Madison: 2,599 16. Grand Rapids: 718----------16. Detroit: 2,081 17. Lincoln: 637---------------------17. Fort Wayne: 1,614 18. Dayton: 522--------------------18. Dayton: 1,573 19. Fort Wayne: 384--------------19. Akron: 1,312 20. Akron: 197-----------------------20. Cleveland: 622 Change 2000-2018 Columbus: +35562 Minneapolis: +13506 Chicago: +12960 Indianapolis: +12315 St. Paul: +8897 Kansas City: +6366 Cincinnati: +5332 Des Moines: +5153 Omaha: +3977 Grand Rapids: +3214 Lincoln: +2305 St. Louis: +2277 Milwaukee: +2220 Wichita: +1806 Madison: +1608 Fort Wayne: +1230 Akron: +1115 Dayton: +1051 Cleveland: -453 Detroit: -1168 Columbus added almost as many as the next 3 cities combined during the period.

Speaking of Columbus, the exploding population from Africa has well surpassed Minneapolis to become the largest in the Midwest, even vs. Chicago. The story in the Dispatch about the relative ease to get a green card there might explain some of it.

To be fair, i don't think that is actually a change. Foreign-born growth has been generally positive for many years, even in Cleveland. It just hasn't been nearly enough to cover the much larger domestic out-migration.