Toddguy

Just not on High Street in a (supposedly)luxury building. I HATE Dollar General! I just can't believe they can't get something better there.

I don't know how much we can really deduce from the placeholder buildings and the extra buildings in the renderings at this point. It may be too soon at this point(but of course they included them anyway). In Aderwent's previous post(the one where he says there are larger pictures)there is a 20 story plus building which seems to be looming from the site of the Spaghetti Warehouse building. But speaking on them anyway, I don't like the parking garages(with nothing on top of them)lining Broad and Town(especially Broad)...but again they are just placeholders. Those three look-alike placeholder monoliths are ugly as sin imo.

If this is not a joke then I am just completely undone by this news.

Maybe Manufactured homes is not quite what I was thinking...maybe more like home kits or something? I am not talking about Mobile homes here. Just kits with everything provided that can be assembled on site...sort of like the Ikea furniture of housing? If it is done right why zone it out? I imagine the zoning out of 50 years ago was directed towards trailers and mobile homes-we have come along way since then and need affordable housing-especially in urban areas where the demand for it is high.

This has got to be a joke, right? A f*cking Dollar General? This is High Street downtown booming not West Jeff or Obetz. This is a joke, right?

And it is good that at least amid the overall approval there is concern over the architecture-maybe that concern can be extended to the garages and skywalks as well? Still going to be cautiously optimistic here and hope for some changes/corrections for the better. *Why is this not letting me edit my comments so I have to post a second post? Mods?

Well nothing wrong with critiquing the project-it can stand for some improvements as you and others have mentioned. Are there more skybridges than the two across Starling? I can kind of accept those since it looks like Starling is not going to be much more than a connecter/service road(unfortunately). At least they broke up the one big massive garage along Starling and are not going to close off State st. I agree it would be better without any skybridges. I also HATE the single use garages with just parking on the roof-they should try to do something like green roofs, residential, or ANYthing but parking on the roofs-but again isn't it the city of Columbus that is going to be responsible for the garages?-if so than we can't expect too much $$$ to go into them(again unfortunately.) I do see some good things-a market like a mini-North Market(for the Mini-Pearl District lol)in the building with the serrated top is good, and we have yet to see how most of this development will relate to the most important areas. This phase only relates to a bit of Belle and State-we will have to see how the future phases relate to the rest of Belle and then all of Broad, Town, and Rich streets-they had better be pedestrian friendly and relate to the street very well on these routes. JMO here. And it is good that at least amid the overall approval there is concern over the architecture-maybe that concern can be extended to the garages and skywalks as well?

For some reason I am having problems with editing/adding to existing posts of mine, so I would also say that they need to include pedestrian bridges for this, particularly on the north end. There needs to be connection(pedestrian at least) between this district(including East Franklinton)and the arena district. (sorry for the multiple posts)

Also the nine quarter blocks in the initial phase is only about one fourth of the whole development if you include the triangle area south of COSI.

Well given that so much of this area will be non-residential-it will truly be a mixed use development-I don't think this is too bad at all. Yes it could be taller, denser, etc. but it is at at least much taller than most of anything else that has been proposed(everything proposed so far is in the 8-11 floor range, and this is just the first phase). That is close to the ten floor plus highest density land use plan from the 2000/2010 plan. Also there is the opportunity for greater height in the future phases if this is a big success. Any other visions have had only a few tall buildings(one or two real highrises) while nearly everything else was in the six to ten story range. I would be perfectly fine with the rendering that shows this phase plus three 16 story buildings in the future phases shown(but with different architecture as those look a bit ugly to me lol.) If this works out it could lead to something taller and denser than anything else that has been proposed. I am glad they are doing this in phases so if demand is high they can upgrade plans for the rest of the area, especially if we can manage to get a cultural institution on that triangle on land south of COSI. Also the Jeffrey development cannot really be compared to this because it is not mixed use really-almost all is residential imo. Also I believe that the developable area of that project is somewhere between 30 and 40 acres which is a bit bigger. I like that they rejected "the big fix" type of thing(Buckingham) and are doing this in phases-which may be our best chance at higher density. I would not be disappointed if this averaged ten floors with a few highrises on the north and southern edges(where I would prefer the taller buildings anyway.) I am going to be cautiously optimistic(even though we have been burned before)on this and hope that they backlog of supply vs demand is finally addressed. I understand your position, but I am going to take the glass half full view on this one. At these heights and densities, I think this really can turn out to be more of "the western side of our downtown" and help define the area and also help direct the CBD more to the west and toward the large parklands around COSI bringing more focus to the river(and hopefully more riverside or riverclose amenities like restaurants and retail. If done right, this square of land defined by Civic Center Drive, Belle, Spring and Long, and the Miranova complex could almost be like a mini Central Park for us-especially if we can get three cultural institutions in it. Just my honest opinion here.

I wish they could mass produce these types of small homes to be delivered and assembled on lots. So much infill could happen in urban areas on vacant lots or in place of or incorporating backyard garages. It would be so much cheaper(than what these cost) and probably a dozen or so different models would do. Do you think anything like this is possible? Of course you would need the zoning to allow this type of thing(allowing garage conversions/replacements in alleys). So many garages in back of homes with alleys are not even used and just store tools, junk, etc. It would never fly in areas like Clintonville or German Village, but maybe in other urban neighborhoods close to these areas where the Nimby/Museumication of neighborhood thing is not so strong and they might welcome something like this.

Damn Africa is really big.

I love these. Do you have any idea of the square footage of each and the footprint they take up?

Well I guess maybe I am just expecting too much given the amount of population growth the region is having. This particular site is to me like the Nichols(or whatever it is)along HIgh was to you-one of the most prime sites in the CBD. I agree and generally I respond favorably and have defended this city for decades, but I can get a bit frustrated with development, and it came out in this thread. I just hope whatever we get at this site is dense and is built with a good design and with quality materials. I need to remind myself that, although I think this is a really important site, there are plenty of other sites in the CBD and there are bigger fish to fry really when it comes to the city as many people have pointed out in this thread. *I may have responded harshly regarding this site and in my comments and I do apologize to those involved.

^Very good news for these buildings. We need to fill in the surface parking lots, but I also think we need to save as much of the historic fabric of the downtown as possible(what is left of it that is). These older buildings add character that you just cannot get with new builds, and they should be saved if possible as in this way, or at least the facades should be saved if not possible(as they are doing on Park street with the hotel). This is an interesting cluster of small buildings and ground floor retail and residential for these sounds great to me.

Thanks for finding this as it is also the one I was thinking about. I really like the idea of this, just not so much the top tapering as it does to such a sharp point-maybe something at the top similar to Torre Verre in NYC? (Not that I am trying to suggest that I know everything about how real estate and development works, or that I know what is economically feasible or warranted, nor am I griping and expressing "height frustrations" and all. smh.)

This is just bizarre. Mini Millennial Tower? It actually says that at the link. It almost does sound like a joke. However if they end up building both(very unlikely I think) I would be ok with that. *I think abandoned projects is probably the right place for this now unfortunately. Arshot strikes out again.

Thanks for putting things in perspective.

I guess I just have unrealistic hopes and expectations for Columbus. Sometimes I feel like just giving up for anything for Columbus that is more than mediocre. In other words, sometimes I feel like Jman on CU seems to feel all of the time lol. Development in this city just can seem so incredibly frustrating. ya know? I just want something better for the city.

Too bad they can't coordinate the whole thing using both areas(red and blue). The top parcel of the blue part(the Dispatch building itself)is the only part of the blue that can't be used anyway. The last thing we should want is any surface parking facing Third. *sigh*. Probably won't be anything over 20 floors anyway, but as you said, hopes and dreams and all.

It was right next to the Dispatch building and the top half was basically a tapering spire. There was a second phase that would have lined State between Third and Fourth with lower midrise buildings and parking. It might have had some massing over the Dispatch building but I can't remember and I also can't find it online. It was all shiny glass and they had renderings of it from different angles. It was on CU maybe Walker might be able to access it.

I would kill babies for a 50 story 700 foot plus modern tower with intense angles and architecture at this site, but as many have pointed out, it will probably be a *midrise with some associated six story boxes and the(for Columbus)ubiquitous single use separated open concrete parking garage. *midrise likely to start out at 15-20 floors and be downgraded to 12 lol. I just can't get any expectations up-this is Columbus and all we are talking about. I fear a repeat of what happened at Gay/Long and High. *Anyone have any saved pics of that vision tower that was 1,000 feet for this site?-I know they had posted it long ago on Columbus Underground?

Klumbus

My soul is dead after this post. And no bathroom privileges?

If they don't go very big(as in not just dense, but tall)with this I give up on the city. If there is ANY place in the city that calls for height and yes, drama it is this site. Go big(and tall)or go home on this one. I would rather it stay like it is than have to "settle" like happens so many times. C'mon Columbus! And I hope those "700 footer" rumors are somehow attached to this. Dump Millennial Tower if necessary and push everything to this site if needed.