DTCL11

It does include the corner building. I don't think the commission is going to put up much of a fight to preserve the corner building. For some reason I get a feeling they will roll on it given its proximity to the rest of the ubiquitous mega builds. It seems to be in a zone they have less care to preserve?

For reference, Amazon has over $35 billion in 50 AWS data centers in Northern Virginia as the main hub of their US East Region. That doesn't include shipping facilities. While Columbus gets alot of attention, it's not anything crazy compared to some other areas but we are a concentration area for Amazon's US East region. A high tier but not the highest.

It's a risk I'd be 100% willing to take and think the region should as well. The impact will not be as detrimental as you'd think. Some projects may be impacted but I doubt it would be a significant amount. I don't tend to flinch on the concept of 'then developers won't bother'. Developers will still come and in good numbers. Even looking at the ones I take issue with now, a simple rework isn't going to make or break Peninsula or Bridge Park. Like I said, it's taking best practices that many are doing and just making sure everyone does. At the very least, convertible ground floor space. But the easiest of the rooftop requirements could result in net income for builders by partnering with energy companies for solar arrays. Energy capture is going to potentially make them more money than the parking spaces below. It also help reduce weather exposure and reduce the need for plowing and treating the top level adding to the reduced maintenance cost etc. There's really great concepts of food producing greenhouses that could be transformational but I'll settle for solar arrays or water absorbing green roofs.

Bahaha. Glad we started putting his feet to the fire now! This quote speaks to his usual M.O. on capital for big projects and it usually doesn't work out. Interesting that selling is on the table. I WISH HE WOULD SELL THE MILLENIAL SITE. "Columbus' Schiff Properties plans to either co-develop the site with Chicago-based Mavrek Development or sell it to the firm, Scott Schiff said. The project is expected to cost between $50 million and $70 million, he said, depending on its ultimate height." Looks like Mavrek's bread and butter is residential rehab and 5 over 1 but they are actively building their first (?) Mid-Rise at 21 stories in Streeterville. Seems like a solid partner. It's also good to see a Chicago developer dip their toes in Columbus.

I've expressed it before. At this point, I just have little tolerance for unconcealed ground level garages outside of the alley side. It's best practices and just completes these projects. I understand it's fine but it takes them from 80-90% to 100%. Even small things like a walk up stop makes a big difference. It doesn't even have to be retail. Maybe it's a bike storage area, Amazon delivery hub, display windows etc. I'm also close to little tolerance for an open air parking deck top levels. Roofs need to be green space, green for water retention, solar, or residential/office. One of those things that needs to be the norm under pressure of zoning. It's been awhile since we discussed it but the potential that the top levels of these decks present for good is immense. Just need someone to start setting the bar.

Looks like they'll make the same mistake CH made in not concealing the garage. One of those so close yet so far things about parts of Bridge Park. (And now penisula)

Perhaps just as exciting as the Merchant Building starting, the Thompkins Studio (High/Wilcox/Thompkins) project has put up 'Now Leasing' Banners 😲 🙌

I had the same criticism. I also think that it contrasts too much from the James. I understand wanting a bit of a difference but the James went for more muted grays and blues and the Med Center is more tans and reds and it just doesn't mesh well. It almost has the effect of making the new tower look dated already when compared to the James, especially on those angles where you see a large section of tan panels and not much else. From 315, the juxtaposition isn't so much of an issue but From the east it's more noticeable than I expected it to be. In the end, I think it will be a just ok design but definitely not as great as I was hoping for on such a prominent build.

Was not able to grab a picture this morning but it looks like the med center is pretty close to topping out. Not sure how much more structural steel needs to go up but it has definitely peaked, they have heavy equipment on the roof and are installing light steel for the screening

We can grafitti sections and leave them standing in various plazas like the Berlin wall.

They're going to upcycle the peaked roof Drury Inn is trying to get rid of.

I know it's been brought up before so I've been doing some researching and pondering and am putting it here for when it inevitably comes up again regarding the number of gates planned for the new terminal. The FAA allows 32 operations per runway per hour. For Columbus, that is 64 operations per hour. untilizing their current operation of 19 hours a day, the airport can technically handle1,216 landing and takeoffs per day. So Columbus will never have to worry about runway capacity. On to gates. Currently, with 31 gates, a high end of 90 minutes for turn around per gate, (knowing Southwest and regional jets are 60 minutes or less) that's just under 400 planes. So roughly 200 Arrivals and 200 Departures per day. In reality, current gate capacity is higher than that but it's a safe place to start. Currently, Columbus sits around 120 Arrivals and 120 Departures a day for commercial Airlines. so there is still plenty of room for growth even within its current number of gates. The issue is and has always been gate space and relief space largely related to having separate concourses. (Again, knowing that areas will always feel full during the peak schedules and feel empty at other times due to blocking. Thats something that is inevitable even with brand new terminals). A plan to grow to 36 gates would allow 443 operations and 40 gates just over 500, well above the current 240ish operations a day. With that, I am not concerned with the number of gates. Columbus doesn't really have a capacity problem. And isn't even particularly close to outgrowing it's current number of gates. Further, a new streamlined terminal will presumably help improve turn around across the board. Columbus will likely not see itself approach true capacity for many years to come, if in some of our lifetimes. I think my main curiousity regarding gates is that the airport has so far only specified wanting narrowbody gates and nothing about a widebody gate. Granted, there's alot that needs to happen before anything Transoceanic *might* be on the table but you'd think even just one widebody gate might be included in the plans to help attract any potential widebody routes, domestic or international. It maybe it's just an unspoken given if it's easy to convert an end gate to widebody. As an aside, Gates C48-C51 get used just a couple times a day if that. Why I'd support swapping Delta to A and Southwest to C but it's not going to happen due to the politics of airports. But then again, Columbus feels bursting at the seams in the morning because Soutwesr ships off 6 737s between 5:30 and 7am. Then they only turn around 1 plane per hour in C gates until 11:30, when they use 2 of their 6 gates. As another side note, Gensler hired the former head of Disney Imagineering to help guide designs across the company. Whether that applies to Columbus will yet to be seen but it does show Gensler is very focused on the user experience. Anyway.. late night ponderings while we wait.

^that's a fair point I found this interesting in their mission.

I know. I was just circling back to the commission ignoring pretty clear adjacent precedent so if they got a bug up their you know what's, they could deny 9/High if they wanted even with the other builds.

Can we counter propose a redevelopment of the site? Lol Edit: on a more serious note, it is city land. I wonder what the conditions of the land lease are that may hinder or promote convincing someone to redevelop the property. Doesn't need to be a Hilton 3.0, but something that utilizes the space better, and has more functionality and perhaps uses the new garage behind rather than its own garage.

Unfortunately, our very linear development is a byproduct of the historically in tact residential neighborhoods, particularly along the High Street Corridor. Any small retail spaces off side streets that aren't named Broad, 5th, Lane, etc will be scarce. Even once fully developed, it will be hard to fill in unless we start to convert housing. As mentioned, there are small individual retail spots in the neighborhoods but many have long been converted to high end residential so they will likely never return. My guess is that the bulk of the High Street Corridor will not be an area of that growth into the neighborhoods with the exception of a couple spots (Old North has some, German Village, etc) but in Franklinton, we are much more likely to see some of that since much of the housing stock was leveled. This also isn't necessarily uncommon for cities and neighborhoods. But without the central hub of downtown being a well filled in winding center of activity anywhere you turn, it highlights that. I think that developing downtown and Franklinton into more x/y axis retail neighborhoods will help the perception in the long run as well.

There's 7+ story campus buildings across the street. The south side of lane is a wall of them. The north side of lane is reaching that point. The southern end of campus has mid-rises abutting residential all over. It's really just a personal thing for them. They don't want it in this part of the UD because it's where more home owners are. Otherwise, the precedent for high and lane at 8 stories exists. They at least have an argument for a 17 story building being unprecedented.

With love, UD Commission

I'd have to do some digging but I believe you're right. I can't recall if it was something like 470 or 271 but I think I remember it had a specific designation already as well. Now, Columbus as of the 90s officially opposed an outer outerbelt as shown below in the 96 comprehensive plan. I think intel will mostly care about getting freight in and out. They'll let the rest be handled by ODOT. Im 100000000% opposed but if the poeers will it into existence, any outer outerbelt needs to take the model of Texas and say, 'you get one free. But after that, you're extra outer belts are tolls roads. Pay for your own excessive travel needs' But I think this is largely ODOT driven and other leaders whose jobs it is to plan roads and nothing else. Job security I suppose.

What a crock. These folks must cringe everytime they go to a city where a building juxtaposed another by more than 10 ft in height difference. This isn't disney. Or the villages. Or easton. Not everything needs a nice neat little packaged transition. I'm in West Lafayette this week for work and gasped at this super block and thought about how amazing something like this would be as a hub of campus development. If West Lafayette can find it in their hearts to allow this... a block away from historic homes and businesses... High Street and Lane are more than an appropriate place.

If farmers can kill turning 23 into limited access within weeks, you better bet that the right opposition would kill any chance of an outerbelt. Also, this probably belongs in highways thread. Yes, Intel Intel Intel. But central ohio has talked about it for decades and it comes and goes.

Yes. But their projects are usually worth the wait. Not that it's applicable to this site but they are also one of the best preservationists around too.

Wpcc88 coming in hot to admonish anyone for daring to bring something up that could potentially question a small business decision or opinion 🙄 especially is it's one he may or may not have a personal relationship with. This forum is basically SimCity. Other developers are moving ahead with stuff. I think it's perfectly reasonable for someone to say it feels like they've been a little silent lately without you rushing in like that. It's OK to point out these things have impacts and proportionately impact different developers but accusing folks of not living in the real world as we watch plenty of other development charge ahead? It's par for the course in these forums to have a thoughts about someone else owning any piece of property who might be able to get shovels moving. But we can always count on Wpcc88 to be the unrelenting defender of all things small business because those who have never owned or worked for one can never have any question about them or their motives, even if it has negative impacts to overall progress. The small business owner is always right.

Not sure. Glytch appears to have had a booth and put alot of time and effort into CES last year and this year it's an afterthought. For me it's more consistent with what feeds my skepticism. I'll have to look in to E3 to see how they've treated it.

I'm just placing this here as a bit of a time keeper since it was brought up in the other thread. Re: Main Bar Dispatch June 23, 2021 "After reviewing the reports, city staff recommended approving the demolition, a change from its previous position. The commission approved the demolition on the condition that Schiff Properties has a redevelopment plan approved for the site within two years. The development firm also owns surrounding parking lots on the northwest corner of Main and S. High streets. ... “We’ve been looking to do a project for the last eight to 12 months," said the firm's Jared Schiff. "I don’t think it’s too far away. I'm not going to give a definitive time, but I’d say within the next six to 12 months we could potentially have plans in front of the city to review," he added. "We really want to do something beautiful on this corner; we know it’s a critical corner to Downtown." ... Mike Shannon, an attorney representing Schiff Properties, ridiculed the notion that the building was architecturally valuable. “I have done a number of demolitions in historic districts throughout my career and inevitably the testimony says you’re tearing down paradise to put up a parking lot," Shannon told the commission. "Well, we’re surrounded by a parking lot, our interim use is a parking lot and the only pair of dice we found in this bar was the pair in the back room they used to shoot craps.”" https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2021/06/23/downtown-commission-votes-demolish-venerable-main-bar/5319091001/