Matthew67

Why?

No, its ALL investment, new or rehabbed. It's comparing the value of multi-family investment. Columbus really is that far ahead of the rest of Ohio.

That's how identity politics works.

Was Cranley attempting to use a Hot Tub Time Machine to take the city back to 1986? good one, It's funny because it is actually true. His political coalition yearns to return to a former era.

That's great. More reasons to be hopeful about Cincinnati's economy.

You can simply rent an apartment if you want to get your kids into a "good" school district. You don't need to own a house in the district. Buy the starter home and then rent it out to pay the rent in a complex in the desired school district, if having a theater program with a hydraulic stage lift is critically important to you. Do people actually do that?

The three you mentioned in your response are too far for the businesses that I'm focusing on, but yes they have relieved the issues in the southern end of Short North. I'm more concerned with parking for business and how that impacts the neighborhoods. A garage is needed in the northern section, whether it be for the new food hall, Skully's, BrewDog or even Condado in that area. Also this would take care of another seemingly useless flat parking lot. A garage would make more sense in this area as it continues to grow. I completely agree. The North end of the Short North is about to develop out even more, as the Southern portion is nearing its "completion" to a degree. I feel a parking garage will at some point be included. Who knows what will come of the old Family Dollar site or the surface parking lot next to the Garden Theater as well. I think as this end gains more momentum, we will see options proposed with developments. I also feel that momentum is going to pour onto 5th Avenue, headed east towards Summit and 4th, and in the very long run all the way over into the newly developed Grant Park. It's misguided to think of a place as 'complete.' If Manhattan continues to have major new construction, no place is 'complete.' Who knows what could happen in Short North if it's allowed to.

At today's CPS school board meeting, Josh Spring apparently claimed that "you don't see kids playing in Washington Park anymore" which has gotta be one of the more blatantly false things that you can say about Washington Park. It's is packed with people of all ages and all races, all the time. Maybe not so far this year due to the unusually cold spring we're having. But to claim that the park has been gentrified and is no longer used by neighborhood kids is just absurd. There's a perverse kind of self-hatred in Spring's 'career' against OTR's development. He has a romantic vision of himself as a kind of Robin Hood protecting the poor against the evil Lord of the Manor. I shows that he thinks he's better than the residents of OTR and that he is not somehow really one of them. What would he do without them?

No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this. No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. I'm not convinced. Buildings of different ages have always occupied most american cities. It's just a rationale for the development game.

Yeah, none of the other avenues in Columbus have quite what High was starting with. The big difference between Cincinnati and Columbus in this regard is that Vine St.'s commercial storefronts end abruptly at the bottom of the hill and can't possibly attract any foot traffic from the university. Plus, commercial activity is spread out throughout OTR and not limited to the same extent to the central thoroughfare. Definitely, one of the unusual characteristics of Columbus is that all of the action is concentrated around relatively narrow High St., but Summit & 4th are wide. So is Neil. I can't think of another area of the country where something comparable exists. Short North isn't successful because of its form. Success can take many forms. Both Dallas and Manhattan are successful. It's successful because it has access to a rapidly growing metro economy. Creating the right urban form doesn't actually cause economic growth, it just structures it's patterns.

No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this.

No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean?

Posters were warned previously by ColDayMan to get back on the topic of Short North development. This is not the thread to discuss Cincinnati development issues.

The secret to growth in boomtowns is that they just let it happen. They don't seek to manage development patterns by influencing individual development projects. Boomtowns just ride the wave, they don't presume that growth is 'theirs' to direct. Short North is a long way from the growth of Dallas, Nashville, Austin, Denver, or Charlotte, but it's the closest we have to it in the region. Short North grew because Columbus government let it. It didn't insist that only local developers build projects of a certain form in pre-approved locations owned by select local families using public money and eminent domain to 'direct' what goes where. In Cincinnati, this has resulted in many abandoned projects as the anointed dominate development by gaming a complex set of rules and procedures. Far fewer projects are abandoned in Columbus. They just let them happen. Columbus' economic development strategy is focused on people, instead of buildings.

Also there are little things like zoning laws, popular opinion, elections, etc. that also come into play. People will have to want to make it happen, or have it forced upon them if they don't. Very difficult to do, as we can see with Clintonville as an example. ^True, but so does Private investment and plans and risk. Only within the rules that they can play by. Government makes the rules.

Coast is a local Cincinnati version of 'trumpian rage.' Their sense of entitlement is limitless.

I've always thought that Columbus' best economic characteristic was not its status as a capital or having OSU or even a diversified economy, but rather that leadership's ability to sell and expand upon its limited assets to maximum effect. It doesn't have the legacy cultural amenities, or the grand-scale development. It doesn't have the name recognition. It doesn't have the global pull. It doesn't have a lot of things. And instead of trying to become every other city, it simply quietly works to make its own fundamentals of economic and social life run as smoothly as possible. Livability isn't flashy, but it is attractive to a lot of people. I'd argue that OSU increasingly DOES have "global pull" for academics, administrators, and ambitious students. I wouldn't say that Columbus is particularly "quiet" either. Columbus' leadership is much better at PR than other mid-sized midwest metros. I'm sure RANA FOROOHAR got a lot of help from people in Columbus in writing her article. If she'd asked leaders in Cincinnati the same thing, she'd have gotten a "who wants to know" response.

Columbus isn't just growing faster, it's growing differently..with an economic diversity and rising level of skills that other midwestern metros, except Chicago and Indy, aren't creating.

The first step is to not mock people who suggest that change and growth are possible. Next, set aside resentment of others' success and learn from them instead. Third, don't nostalgically reflect on your city's past greatness and see politics as score-settling among groups competing to show that YOU are a true local (this consumes politics in Cincinnati) and that others are disloyal and threaten an imagined social unity. Beyond these obvious suggestions, RANA FOROOHAR describes what's working in Columbus in an article published in the Financial Times last week. Her main point is that in Columbus, "The Democratic mayor went to the Republican city fathers and persuaded them to support a tax rise, the first in nearly four decades. They agreed, on condition that a chunk of that money would go into a public-private economic development partnership that focused on how to cultivate human capital for an era in which all value will reside in intellectual property, data and ideas." It's clearly working. https://www.ft.com/content/3205ef22-334e-11e8-b5bf-23cb17fd1498

Columbus shows that large and sustained growth like that is possible in mid-sized Midwestern metros. There isn't some magical and all-powerful force keeping investment from entering the Midwest. It IS possible. It can happen elsewhere in the region if people want it enough and are willing to make the institutional and social changes necessary to make way for it.

"demand" and "markets" don't create themselves. Government investment and plans affect development patterns. If enough people WANT to make things happen in Columbus they can.

What's the "new Stargel?"

Ok but again, do we really need it? People b*tch and moan all the time about how much Nationwide is costing taxpayers, imagine what that would be with a billion dollar rail project. Personally myself and my friends all 28-35 would rather have the rail connection to Chicago versus a trail in town. We have uber and lyft and the COTA circulator; personally I'm good! Who's "we"? I-270 cost billions. Do we need it? It doesn't produce a penny in income. Personally, I don't care about others' individual happiness. Actually I-270=commerce=income for our economy, so WRONG! What is "our" economy? If you think 1-270 is so great why won't you pay for it? It doesn't produce a penny in income. Not one penny. It's money loser. This I am still confused about, do you suggest that we make it a toll road? I pay taxes and I hope that's what some of that money is going towards is maintaining the roads so I can get back and forth to conduct business. Do you see where I'm going with this "our economy" thing? My economy and yours may be very different. What's good for you may be bad for me. The taxes you pay don't remotely cover the cost of the roads you use. If you can't pay for your own transportation, you'll have to adjust. I'm sick of subsidizing you. Why should the sales tax I pay on a dinner in Short North be spent on an expressway I never use? Explain to me your economy then? Do you never leave your home? Walk on a sidewalk? Ride a bus? Leave the city at all? Come to the city at all? DO SOMETHING MORE THAN JUST TROLL! I work in educational publishing. I don't need to leave home for my job. I-270 and sidewalks are very different things. I pay for my sidewalks, you don't pay for i-270. I don't need I-270 at all. What is "the city"?

Ok but again, do we really need it? People b*tch and moan all the time about how much Nationwide is costing taxpayers, imagine what that would be with a billion dollar rail project. Personally myself and my friends all 28-35 would rather have the rail connection to Chicago versus a trail in town. We have uber and lyft and the COTA circulator; personally I'm good! Who's "we"? I-270 cost billions. Do we need it? It doesn't produce a penny in income. Personally, I don't care about others' individual happiness. Actually I-270=commerce=income for our economy, so WRONG! What is "our" economy? If you think 1-270 is so great why won't you pay for it? It doesn't produce a penny in income. Not one penny. It's money loser. This I am still confused about, do you suggest that we make it a toll road? I pay taxes and I hope that's what some of that money is going towards is maintaining the roads so I can get back and forth to conduct business. Do you see where I'm going with this "our economy" thing? My economy and yours may be very different. What's good for you may be bad for me. The taxes you pay don't remotely cover the cost of the roads you use. If you can't pay for your own transportation, you'll have to adjust. I'm sick of subsidizing you. Why should the sales tax I pay on a dinner in Short North be spent on an expressway I never use?

When is the last time you were downtown? Not everyone wants to live in the city and even those that do won't ALL want to take public transportation. I was downtown on Saturday. If you don't want to live somewhere, don't live there. Roads ARE "public transportation." They are paid for and owned by government and are for transportation. If you don't like that, don't use them.