DTCL11

Is it that governments look at public buildings and don't want to be landlords? Pedestrian presence should definently be a priority but to what extent and what form is difficult to gauge. The other thing you run into is the fine line between functional and extravagant use of tax payer funds. I would not anticipate any new government building to more than functional. The hope would be that they avoid blank walls like the Coleman center which I agree is definitely poor planning.

I am curious about one part of the article indicating dorian commons was the location of the old courthouse. Was the demolition of the old courthouse another unfortunate byproduct of the overzealous demolition mindsets of the 1970s with a lack of foresight into the benefits of historical structures?

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe the 'Protect old North' has jumped on this proposal. They may be relaxing their position.

Groundbreaking as early as 2022 if everything goes well... I can hardly wait..... As for the lot next to Blind Lady and even Dorian, chain link fencing blocking off public lands is annoying. Even if they aren't the most attractive parks, the fencing looks awful and knowing full well the intent it to keep 'undesirables' out while the city and county lag behind what is actually needed to help the homeless population makes it more frustrating. The official position of 'we are working to preserve the land for potential future development' is ridiculous. And I don't agree that the river and columbus commons are sufficient. That's actually a bit too sparse. If they would spruce up the grass next to the county court, we'd have plenty for the complex, no worries. If it's not going to be a building, let's see a proper park put in there. Green space and urban tree cover should be experienced every other block or so in some form or another. Particularly for areas of attraction. Many people come in and out of the government complexes and never get a chance to see or experience any other areas so for me, it would be important to maintain greenspace at this complex in some form, with the land next to the courthouse being the most logical to me. The south high and third street caps will help as well, although not as much as could be but hey, state funding can only go so far for visionary concepts I suppose. For comparison, many large projects in Chicago are now being pushed to include publicly accessible green space because they've realized the value of these regular respites after years of assuming 'there's a plaza a couple blocks away' or 'it's not far from the park' isn't as sufficient as maybe it once was.

I wonder how much of the old growth they will clear out or if they will maintain good sections of the wooded areas. Otherwise the 'woods' part of the name will be pretty ironic.

Looks great! That 278 spots though is asinine. I understand it's what it will take to help get it through with less opposition but wow, that's high unless they are planning on being a neighborhood parking asset and not just accommodating their own facility.

That looks sharp. I'm glad to see infill along these lines and hope to see more.

Hypothetical Curiosity. Plausibility of a 20 story (give or take) build or two to bridge park? Seems like there is the potential for a central tower or two. As much as I want to see height in the core, I'm itching to see a small tower or two in Bridge Park as well. Have there been any formal announcements or plans for the northern plots or the SE corner of the roundabout other than conceptual plans? I spent the last month in chicago land and seeing some of the random suburban towers (particularly the ones where there is nothing else above 5 stories nearby and vast amounts of land an hour+ from the city), it struck me as more feasible for Dublin to get one sooner than later. Is traffic going to put local leaders and developers on pause for such a project?

Wow. I'm much more confident in this with the updated renderings. Agreed on material selection reservations. The earlier renderings were awful. I agree the incorporation of the townhomes is understandable but a bit awkward in the current form. (Perhaps different treatment of the set back portion above them might help). Would be interesting to see some patio space on the roofs of the original structures. If the commission can approve this, I think we will see a continued expansion of similar density across the city. With the AC Hotel and this setting precedents of how to better (not necessarily perfect) incorporate new and old and add much needed density.

We might look at it that way but generally, corporations probably won't. And while the surrounding neighborhoods have the population and growing, counting on them to support a downtown amenity would also require building the parking infrastructure to support the commute. Goodness knows they could not count on Columbus transit to reduce parking if they are aiming for most if the business coming elsewhere. And while the 'core' might hit that mark, until downtown hits that mark on it's own, downtown won't feel hustling and bustling and probably won't for some time. And if downtown wants to have truly more urban amenities, corporations probably aren't going to be sold on the surrounding area idea, especially with grocery stores as moderately abundant as they are. I'd be happy to pitch it to a company but also not surprised if they don't bite with the surrounding area argument until downtown hits it's own population target and can stand alone for support. Same reason campus has an urban target before anywhere else in the city. I agree with cbussoccer that such an amenity is likely to go to a denser spot before downtown right now with as relatively sparse downtown is for the time being. Then there is the flip side that what happens if one can be convinced, will that jump start more downtown development? It's a chicken and the egg scenario and I'm not sure the grocer is willing to play it.

Let's petition to get kroger to open a marionos. Same parent company. Different model. Popular in Chicago with many versions of an urban store.

Downtown Indy has a population approaching 30,000. Columbus is still sitting around half that. Another factor that helped them is they only had one in Indy prior in the affluent far north suburbs. Putting one downtown draws from a large portion of the city for Indy. I would agree with zyrokai that it will be a long time until Columbus sees a whole foods Downtown with already having 3, including one well inside the outer belt, a downtown whole foods is not going to draw as much. Population is the number one thing holding downtown back. Bringing up to 1000 units online each year is not going to bring a population boom downtown needs to get some amenities other cities have anytime soon. Columbus doesn't benefit from having started with 20k+ residents in old housing stock downtown in the 90s. There isn't a ton of room for population growth without a massive expansion and if we want to hit the 30k point generally seen as a tipping point anytime soon, we are going to need to see 2-3k units brought online annually. Otherwise, columbus will continue the steady climb and just have to be patient. But in all reality, the lack of historical housing stock as a base for the resurgence of downtown has been the biggest factor in Lower population numbers despite faster growth.

This casts additional doubt.

Kroger never committed to return from the outset. Based on there non committal answer to begin with, I have just been operating on assuming they won't return unless announced otherwise.

This is fantastic. Other than the rather surprising location, a much needed asset. I wonder if this will drive the downtown CVS to up their game or even go with the A Store Model with fresh ready to go foods, sushi, etc etc. That's one thing I've always thought about Millenial is how perfect it would be for the urban CVS or Walgreens (as an alternative to the standard suggestions of a Target or Trader Joe's) seen in other cities.

I'll read the full plan at another time but at first glance, it seems this plan hinges alot on getting the state to release land for private development. I'm sure there are more details for the rest of Hilltop but a majority of the CU article focuses on that and transit so I'm curious to see what other factors they are looking into. Otherwise, if it is heavy on the eastern portion of Hilltop (ironically the non hill top portion of Hilltop), it just seems to be an extension of helping Franklinton.

From my understanding, the bottoms was originally contextualized by the geographic terrain and propensity to flood. Also, being the bottom of the western ridge above the river. During white flight, the context was changed. The bottoms was often meant to refer to the 'bottom of the barrel' in that it was an extremely unsafe and unattractive part of the city. I know people born and raised in or near Columbus that only know it under that context as the days of flooding are long gone. The term was never formally adopted from a city standpoint to my knowledge. That connotation stuck for decades. With the resurgence, people thaht have embraced 'the bottoms' see the return to Franklinton as a white washing and just another example of gentrification. People that understand the later context don't embrace a the seemingly derogatory term (to many) as much as the formal term. NPR had some interesting reporting a couple years ago about renaming or 'nicknaming' established neighborhoods once they become attractive through displacement and gentrification. I personally think it would be worth it to keep the name the bottoms even if it becomes a sub neighborhood of Franklinton. Perhaps the commercial and retail hub of West Franklinton could be the 'Bottoms District' Now, the conversation over west vs east Franklinton is charged in itself. It is seen as a way to some to exclude the area west of 315 from economic development etc etc but that argument will slowly dissipate I assume. With such a dividing cavern, it's only reasonable that there be a separation in much the same way that the original German Village portion North of 70 is not considered German Village anymore and has been absorbed into downtown. And if a new Hilltop plan is successfully implemented, the influence from east and west will help West Franklinton. I agree that Hilltop needs this more than Franklinton. I think this may also be a priority for the city because Franklinton has had a strong community plan and vision for a number of years now. I believe their plan was implemented and codified prior to university district plan(?). At the very least, it was finalized before. Not sure about codified in city code. It is nice to see some focus on the east/west portion of the city. Particularly the Hilltop. It, to me, is an often overlooked area of the city that could, offer more affordable housing options for single family homes for those looking for something smaller.

Off topic! Lock it down! Cut the postz! Wait... it's not the cleveland threads?! Ah... we're good then. ? I'm preparing myself for the worst on the surrounding development TBH. With as much if the surrounding project that has already been cut back, I'm not expecting anything beyond a collection of unremarkable 3-4 story buildings that won't even touch the height of the stadium. I won't be surprised if there are delays and further scalebacks. (If you aren't aware of the scale back of the development within months of the announcement I would refer to the other thread for the details)

A welcome addition to downtown. It's being picky but I don't believe the frosted window section should have been approved that way. That should have been facing the side windows IMO.

Same! People thought I was crazy to say the GE in VV was a great one because it wasnt ginormous. My newer go to Has been GE in Clintonville and Lucky's. People still think I'm weird to prefer the smaller 'grossly outdated' store but the big stores don't do as much for me.

Very true. And the quick passage of Racino legislation afterwards was the biggest factor of projections versus reality. I guess I just want more out of Columbus to combat that like the example of FireKeepers in Battle Creek. But that's just me playing SimCasino

The casino already had 2. A 71 and a 21 slot smokers patios. So while this new 3rd patio is a significant addition, it is still a bit frustrating while acknowledging the demand and logistics. As for the hotel, I'm not convinced there is anything that will rise in the near future. The suburban development of a gas station and stand alone restaurant on the corner solidified that for me. The influence of Westland is years down the road and if they build a hotel or two, it doesn't change the fact that Hollywood has no direct attachment. The point for me being the Casino is a flop in the concept of a all in one destination and major draw. It just seems that there are conventional things that a major casino should have (hotel, spa, theater, conference center etc) and these operators have made little attempts to achieve. They haven't done much to separate themselves from other regional casinos or increase demand and therefore tax revenue. IMO, the failure of the tax revenues to meet the projections (which I would have bet money on to begin with) means that we should pressure them to do more to make up that gap. Having some of these things I mention would help that as well as bring in bed taxes and ticket taxes. Especially since being away from town, the casino missed alot of traffic related to other events at the stadiums, convention center, river etc. And to clarify theater, I'm referring to a stage theater/auditorium rather than using the ballroom for concerts etc. The thing too that gets me is the concept of the Casino being a catalyst. Frankly, even if it wasnt there, I think Westland would have still been the same today and that its bright future would have also been the same. I think if done properly, the area was bound to be revitalized by a major westland development some day and not the casino and I dont see the Casino as being the reason a major Westland development would be in the works. Idk. I may be being too picky or too aspirational and perhaps should just accept that it's nothing more than a typical regional casino. I also admittedly look at places like Michigan and Iowa where gambling has been legal long before with big and small casinos. On the outskirts of BattleCreek, the casino there was built, 3 years later the 250 room hotel tower and this year a new 200 room tower will be completed. Keeping in mind there were already hotels nearby in the same way that Holywood has hotels in the vicinity. A much smaller city is able to create a ever growing and in high demand casino and Columbus.... meh... it might come along, eventually... I know its very jman of me but I'm frustrated that the city has not held the casino more accountable to be better at being the catalyst that was pitched. They got their profit and they are content to not worry about whether they actually help the community by being a better draw. The casino is waiting on everyone else to be the catalyst enough for a hotel and not being the catalyst itself.

I believe this is in Europe? But a modern comparative.

That Lane Ave Panera should have never been allowed to be built as is. And that I think is the bigger tragedy. As for gateway, I think part of it has been that so much of the business models of many of the tenants generally rely heavily on students. I think that more competitive rents, more permanent non student residents nearby, infill from the North Short North to Gateway etc will help but it might. And what a more community minded retail scene looks like, I'm not sure but I'm sure there are ideas out there that could help turn it into something that attracts more than students and visitors potentially. I don't ever get terribly worried about the turnover here. There are much denser neighborhoods in Chicago that struggle for retail as well. It's a tough spot being so student heavy IMO.

Would be nice if they would finally build a hotel or a proper theater instead of a 3rd smoking patio ? I didnt find it but wasnt there hubbub a few years ago because the casino filed for land/air rights up to 15ish stories for a potential future development?