TH3BUDDHA

The academics at Ohio State have really improved over time and the students/parents visiting campus are decreasingly the type of people that are interested in seeing ragers at places like Midway right across from the nice, new Union. The sterilization of High near campus was an inevitable result of this. Like the evolution of the rest of Columbus, this is just the natural progression of a growing, changing city. The grungy places are no longer in places like the Short North and right on Ohio State's doorstep. That opens new areas of Columbus to fill those gaps. Of course, this is sad to those of us that went to Ohio State in the past. But, that's life.

Why is it weird to be discussing a proposed project? The proposed project is a restroom, so, we're discussing the possible outcomes of a project like we do for any project here. Personally, I don't like this project for the reasons mentioned above. On top of this, these aren't particularly attractive restrooms. They are barely a step above portable restrooms from the renderings. If you could give me more restrooms like the ones at Bicentennial Park, I'd sign on in a heartbeat. Why do they close those ones so often?

We can try to sugar coat it as much as we want, but unless these are constantly monitored and very well maintained, nobody will want to use these besides homeless people. And, have you ever lived downtown? There are particular areas where homeless congregate that are particularly sketchy at night. I imagine this will become one of those locations.

@CbusOrBust peeking through fences to get us good development shots

I was actually reading that European cities are pretty tough on homelessness in their tourist centers. Maybe this isn't true? But, it seems like large homeless camps in popular areas would not happen in Europe like many cities in the US. In the US, I don't think it's wrong to say that homeless people often make public services unusable or, at least, extremely inconvenient to use, for the general public as it has become politically unpopular in urban areas to be tough on homelessness. I was in San Diego in May and was at a beach bonfire after dark. I attempted to use one of the public restrooms after dark and somebody else that was leaving said that if I can wait, I should, because it was filled with homeless people being sketchy.

To each their own. I personally would not choose to live there. I imagine it would feel bit sketchy at night considering they won't monitor them after 11:30 pm. I also wouldn't choose to live near a gas station.

Yes, that is crucial to the success. I don't really have high hopes. I know the original article said these will only be monitored until 11:30 pm. But, even so, would somebody want to put apartments above ground floor retail near this?

That's a big "if". Do you honestly believe that somebody would want to put apartments and ground floor retail with a homeless restroom by the front door? I find that hard to believe.

I can't imagine this lot will be a desirable place to develop with these restrooms there. Personally, I'd rather have eventual development than these restrooms that will become, if we're being completely honest here, a place for homeless debauchery.

That's what she said.

Did pickleball come out of absolutely nowhere for anyone else? Or, am I the only one? I feel like, one day, I had never heard of it, and the next day, it was everywhere.

Public Markets and Food Halls were different categories. So, West Side Market was competing against North Market, not Budd Dairy.

But then, how would new potential renters enter the parking lot, see a bunch of pasty, slightly overweight people at the pool, and think, "This is a place I want to live."?

Yea, the pushback will be from landlords that will be losing renters to new apartments.

Also, it seems like they had a big section of Carmenton labeled "Big Occupier." I wonder if they already have something in the works or if this is just going to be dedicated land that we can use for any future HQ relocation attempts.

Yes, which is what the discussion was about. You're the one that brought up 161 widening. Right now, as you said, the only viable option for shipping goods from that site is 161. A connector would reduce the need for 161 widening. So, I would imagine that you would support a connector. That's my point.

I'm confused. The article that started this conversation is talking about a rumored 70/71 connector, not widening 161. A Johnstown bypass that connects 70 and 71 would literally accomplish what you are saying here, right? It would give motorists more options.

It seems you're making the case for why this connector should happen.

That whole area is about to be injected with so much life as this and the Peninsula open up

Was this a reddit post?

Every damn time this thread has a new post.

Usually, when somebody says, "You think they would have learned by now", it suggests that the person that is supposed to "have learned by now" has suffered some sort of bad consequence for taking the action, but continues to do the same thing, regardless. My point is that, in this scenario, the developers aren't suffering consequences that "they should have learned by now." They are making a decision that will work out very well for them. I understand that you ACTUALLY mean that you just don't like the design, which I agree with. You just expressed it in an odd way as if the developers keep doing this even though they get bad results.

Tons of people apparently. These complexes always fill up.

Learned what? Like it or not, this apartment complex will fill up rapidly after it is finished.

Why wouldn't the 3C route be a good candidate for them?