March 9, 20232 yr 30 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: As I'm sure you know- 104 goes right over the property- so you definitely get a decent look at it- especially when you're headed west. I just went through there about 10 minutes ago, and now they're digging some huge trench, something they hadn't even started this morning. I'm always surprised how much more stuff is right in that area that you can only see from 104. Good amount of space over there!
March 18, 20232 yr On 11/10/2022 at 1:20 PM, CbusOrBust said: Ground has also broke on The Orchards along Rathmell Rd on the far south side. When complete this project will have 162 multifamily units across seven buildings. Vertical construction has started on The Orchards apartment complex- along Rathmell Rd across from the Google Data Center site
March 28, 20232 yr I believe this proposal is new. There’s now been quite a few affordable housing proposals in this area right off of S High St.
March 29, 20232 yr 22 hours ago, amped91 said: right off of S High St. There's numerous "development opportunities" for sale now along South High on both sides of 104, from the Steelton Village site south to basically Alcott Rd, with one big plot already marked as "sale pending". It will be interesting to see what happens with that stretch of South High in the near future.
March 29, 20232 yr 4 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: There's numerous "development opportunities" for sale now along South High on both sides of 104, from the Steelton Village site south to basically Alcott Rd, with one big plot already marked as "sale pending". It will be interesting to see what happens with that stretch of South High in the near future. I have always wanted to see great development along here, walkable, dense and all at the road. I doubt we will get that, but I can dream.
March 29, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, VintageLife said: I have always wanted to see great development along here, walkable, dense and all at the road. I doubt we will get that, but I can dream. I think Steelton Village is going to make a huge difference for that entire area. I noticed yesterday, there's more pieces of heavy machinery near the back of the site where they've started the initial clean-up work. Unfortunately, it's hard to get very close because when they are not there they gate it off, and when they are there, it's a very busy area with lots of dump trucks in and out.
March 29, 20232 yr Just a little further north along South High from the Steelton Village site- construction has started recently on a plot of land just west of S Wall St between Morrill Ave and Hinman Ave. (Right behind the Southside Baptist Church) Just curious if anyone knows what's being built there?
March 29, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: Just a little further north along South High from the Steelton Village site- construction has started recently on a plot of land just west of S Wall St between Morrill Ave and Hinman Ave. (Right behind the Southside Baptist Church) Just curious if anyone knows what's being built there? Is it this one?
March 29, 20232 yr 38 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: There's numerous "development opportunities" for sale now along South High on both sides of 104, from the Steelton Village site south to basically Alcott Rd, with one big plot already marked as "sale pending". It will be interesting to see what happens with that stretch of South High in the near future. There’s so many homeless people living in the woods back there by the river too. Hopefully all of these affordable housing developments can be used to provide more stable shelter for them.
March 29, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: Just a little further north along South High from the Steelton Village site- construction has started recently on a plot of land just west of S Wall St between Morrill Ave and Hinman Ave. (Right behind the Southside Baptist Church) Just curious if anyone knows what's being built there? A 46-unit affordable housing building from Woda Cooper. https://ohiohome.org/ppd/proposals/2021/HTC/ColumbusRenaissance.pdf
March 29, 20232 yr Just now, amped91 said: Is it this one? That is the address for the lot behind the church, so I would say it is. Good area for more housing.
April 1, 20232 yr Proposal to build 27 townhome units on vacant land at the corner of Lockbourne and Faber, right next to the Marion-Franklin branch of CML. The app notes these units could be for sale or rent.
April 1, 20232 yr On 3/28/2023 at 3:02 PM, amped91 said: I believe this proposal is new. There’s now been quite a few affordable housing proposals in this area right off of S High St. This is a large parcel of land (nearly 8.2 acres). NRP is proposing up to 200 apartment units on the site.
April 1, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, amped91 said: This is a large parcel of land (nearly 8.2 acres). NRP is proposing up to 200 apartment units on the site. This is great news for the area. This site has been in need of some serious TLC for years. I've been wondering what they were doing there. Heavy machinery has been parked on W Barthman near High for over a week now and it looks like they might have already started cleaning some of the site up. Also, the Steelton Village development will extend north to the land behind Dan's Drive In on the west side of the tracks- this would be in the same area but on the east side of the tracks, essentially connecting the two developments!
April 1, 20232 yr How beautifully suburban to completely surround the building with a sea of parking lots. It's not even designed in a way for any potential addition of units in the future either.
April 1, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, DTCL11 said: How beautifully suburban to completely surround the building with a sea of parking lots. It's not even designed in a way for any potential addition of units in the future either. Yep, noticed that also. I get it’s a tucked away spot, but NRI really needs to just give up all their land anywhere outside of grandview. They are ruining urban development and have no eye for the future. Edited April 1, 20232 yr by VintageLife Ignore me, it isn’t NRI, I cannot read
April 1, 20232 yr 30 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Yep, noticed that also. I get it’s a tucked away spot, but NRI really needs to just give up all their land anywhere outside of grandview. They are ruining urban development and have no eye for the future. *NRP. A real estate developer based in Cleveland.
April 1, 20232 yr 16 minutes ago, amped91 said: *NRP. A real estate developer based in Cleveland. Well I need to read a little better. Thanks for pointing that out, they should stay in Cleveland ha
April 1, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, DTCL11 said: How beautifully suburban to completely surround the building with a sea of parking lots. It's not even designed in a way for any potential addition of units in the future either. IMO, this kind of development layout should be completely banned. It's a terrible use of space and land, it's poor design that promotes car-dependent neighborhoods, and even the developer makes out poorly given that they're not even bothering to maximize the potential site profits by building more units. Even if they only have the financing for this number of units, they could build those, let them fill out and then build other phases down the road. There is no reason to build like this.
April 1, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, jonoh81 said: IMO, this kind of development layout should be completely banned. It's a terrible use of space and land, it's poor design that promotes car-dependent neighborhoods, and even the developer makes out poorly given that they're not even bothering to maximize the potential site profits by building more units. Even if they only have the financing for this number of units, they could build those, let them fill out and then build other phases down the road. There is no reason to build like this. It should be band everywhere, but even more so within the 270 loop and even more within 10 minutes of the center of downtown.
April 1, 20232 yr I did just a quick little layout of my own for the site, just to see what could realistically fit in just over 8 acres. This is what I came up with. -The blue box is a parking garage taking up just under 1.4 acres. For comparison, the Goodale garage by the Convention Center is on less than 1 acre. Depending on the number of floors, it could easily accommodate hundreds or even 1000+ cars. -Barthman would be extended into the site and connect to a garage entrance/exit. There would be another entrance/exit on Wall Street. -Reeb Avenue would also be somewhat extended into the site, and a new, small street grid would otherwise be built. All the streets would of course have sidewalks. -The yellow line would be a main sidewalk along Wall Street, and I'm sure they could get the city to finish sidewalks from High Street to connect to the site, including safe crosswalks for pedestrians. -All the orange boxes are buildings. Each one is between 1/2-1.2 acres in size and each accommodating between 100-300 units, depending on the number of floors and overall site size. So between 6x-9x the number of units that are currently being proposed. And there would be 4 individual buildings facing Wall Street instead of one gigantic, block-long building without any design or architectural breakup. -A park/event space in green, about 1.5 acres in size. I noticed the site plan had retention ponds, so if something like that is necessary, it could be a feature of the park. And of course, you could have retail or restaurant spaces anywhere on the ground floor of these buildings, especially facing the park. I feel like this part of the South Side doesn't have a lot of that. But that's just kind of a rough alternative layout and doesn't even have to be anything exaclty like this, but the point is that there's obviously so much more potential for one of the largest undeveloped sites in that part of the city. Edited April 1, 20232 yr by jonoh81
April 8, 20232 yr Vertical construction has started on another apartment building at Buckstone Flats on the far south side That puts it up to roughly 12 apartment buildings in various stages of construction on site
April 9, 20232 yr Light security today so I stopped and snatched a few random pictures of the Google Data Center complex on Rathmell Rd
April 13, 20232 yr Vertical construction started this morning on the third new warehouse going up at the Columbus Castings site
April 15, 20232 yr New Projects Could Bring Hundreds of Affordable Apartments to South Side Cleveland-based NRP Group has two active projects along the South High Street corridor that together could bring over 400 new affordable housing units to the area. One of the projects – a 245-unit apartment development near the corner of Fornof Road and South High Street – has already secured financing and neighborhood approval and will likely break ground by the end of the year. A rezoning for the development still needs the approval of the Development Commission and City Council. Called Dering Family Apartments, the three-building complex will require the demolition of 2300 S. High St., the longtime home of the Rice Bowl restaurant. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/two-projects-could-bring-over-400-affordable-apartments-to-south-side-bw1/ "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
April 15, 20232 yr 9 hours ago, ColDayMan said: New Projects Could Bring Hundreds of Affordable Apartments to South Side Cleveland-based NRP Group has two active projects along the South High Street corridor that together could bring over 400 new affordable housing units to the area. One of the projects – a 245-unit apartment development near the corner of Fornof Road and South High Street – has already secured financing and neighborhood approval and will likely break ground by the end of the year. A rezoning for the development still needs the approval of the Development Commission and City Council. Called Dering Family Apartments, the three-building complex will require the demolition of 2300 S. High St., the longtime home of the Rice Bowl restaurant. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/two-projects-could-bring-over-400-affordable-apartments-to-south-side-bw1/ I was glad to see mention of the Lowe’s-adjacent project. That one, at the time it was proposed, was described as bringing “hundreds” of units to the area. With all of these and Steelton Village, South High is gonna get a lot more sense in the coming years. I just wish that, instead of all the surface parking lots, the developers could get the city to help fund a few strategically placed parking garages, or that a BRT line were already in place and help get rid of some of the need for so many cars.
April 15, 20232 yr 11 hours ago, ColDayMan said: New Projects Could Bring Hundreds of Affordable Apartments to South Side Cleveland-based NRP Group has two active projects along the South High Street corridor that together could bring over 400 new affordable housing units to the area. One of the projects – a 245-unit apartment development near the corner of Fornof Road and South High Street – has already secured financing and neighborhood approval and will likely break ground by the end of the year. A rezoning for the development still needs the approval of the Development Commission and City Council. Called Dering Family Apartments, the three-building complex will require the demolition of 2300 S. High St., the longtime home of the Rice Bowl restaurant. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/two-projects-could-bring-over-400-affordable-apartments-to-south-side-bw1/ Love the units coming, just like someone said before, the parking is awful with these developments and that is super annoying
April 24, 20232 yr On 4/1/2023 at 7:42 AM, amped91 said: This is a large parcel of land (nearly 8.2 acres). NRP is proposing up to 200 apartment units on the site. Cleanup has started at this site too. No structures have been tore down yet but machinery is on site for that. -very excited to see this site repurposed!
April 24, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, CbusOrBust said: Cleanup has started at this site too. No structures have been tore down yet but machinery is on site for that. -very excited to see this site repurposed! Meh... It's a terrible project for the site.
April 24, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, CbusOrBust said: Cleanup has started at this site too. No structures have been tore down yet but machinery is on site for that. -very excited to see this site repurposed! This is a great project, glad to see it is happening.
April 24, 20232 yr 12 hours ago, jonoh81 said: Meh... It's a terrible project for the site. Sometimes as much as we would like things to be different we have to take what we can get. Life, urban development, etc. are not fair.
April 24, 20232 yr 19 minutes ago, Toddguy said: Sometimes as much as we would like things to be different we have to take what we can get. Life, urban development, etc. are not fair. Or we could expect the city and commissions to do their job and not rubber stamp terrible things for the sake of good enough. A simple reworking of this site would have born little to no additional cost to the developer while also adding to better urban fabric and future potential of the site. The city and commissions are the exact people who should be pushing for things to be correct and not good enough.
April 24, 20232 yr 41 minutes ago, DTCL11 said: Or we could expect the city and commissions to do their job and not rubber stamp terrible things for the sake of good enough. A simple reworking of this site would have born little to no additional cost to the developer while also adding to better urban fabric and future potential of the site. The city and commissions are the exact people who should be pushing for things to be correct and not good enough. Yeah we can do that and still have crappy stuff slip through. This is better than the site sitting idle. And we can not expect perfection so every now and then we just have to let things go and pick our battles as nobody has the time or energy to keep the feet of the developers, commissions, the city, etc. to the fire over every. single. site. I get what you are saying but in the grand scheme of things their are more important sites. *plus I am saving all my anger and tears for the inevitable huge letdown for the Westland site. And don't "come for me" today as I am not in the mood./s Just considering the letdown likely coming with the Westland site has not only ruined my day, but has put me off my food. Edited April 24, 20232 yr by Toddguy
April 24, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Toddguy said: This is better than the site sitting idle We live in Merion Village and was chatting with our neighbors who are also very excited (and surprised) to see this site finally cleaned up. While the proposal for the property isn't perfect, it's one of those plots of land that you always wondered if it would ever be something other than an eyesore. We're definitely excited to see the west side of High from Barthman down to the Steelton Village site active again!
April 24, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, Toddguy said: Yeah we can do that and still have crappy stuff slip through. This is better than the site sitting idle. And we can not expect perfection so every now and then we just have to let things go and pick our battles as nobody has the time or energy to keep the feet of the developers, commissions, the city, etc. to the fire over every. single. site. I get what you are saying but in the grand scheme of things their are more important sites. *plus I am saving all my anger and tears for the inevitable huge letdown for the Westland site. And don't "come for me" today as I am not in the mood./s Just considering the letdown likely coming with the Westland site has not only ruined my day, but has put me off my food. We don't have to have crappy stuff slip through like this. It shouldn't be acceptable. Sure, some projects may not be the best utilization of a site in terms of density, units, etc but there is no excuse for a 100000% suburban style development in the core less than a block from High Street at this point. Slipping through shouldn't be a thing or something to shrug off. Every single site matters. And it's not like the commission is hearing hundreds of them to even warrant 'slipping' by. This isn't saying it needed more units or anything fancier etc. Just a more appropriate land use and set up. This is a perfectly simple battle to take up because allowing these here will allow developers to do more of the same in this area and that's the last thing we need.
April 24, 20232 yr I don't get why this site is being criticized so heavily? It's a wooded area cornered in by railroad, a Salvation Army warehouse and auto repair shops. It's no more "prime real estate" than the other southside developments are similar in scope and design which have been gratefully received. Why does the Rice Bowl conversion get the thumbs up when it's no different (and in a comparable or arguably better location)?
April 25, 20232 yr 19 hours ago, PrestoKinetic said: I don't get why this site is being criticized so heavily? Because a lot of different people have their own visions and views about how to spend other people's money on projects even though they do not have the capacity to develop anything close to a project of that scale on their own.
April 25, 20232 yr 33 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Because a lot of different people have their own visions and views about how to spend other people's money on projects even though they do not have the capacity to develop anything close to a project of that scale on their own. The rice bowl site should receive criticism as well but there haven't really been updates since. The reason this site is getting so much discussion now is there are updates. And it goes beyond criticizing what other people do with their money to meet arbitrary vision. Again, this isn't anymore more than pushing for a better urban layout. Its not even asking developers to add more floors or more units as we do all the time in those 'Next Short North' and downtown areas. It is incumbent on city leaders to push back and make these developers do better everywhere. To have a longer term vision in mind. There's a ton of low value sites on the south side but if we just treat each as being grateful for what we get, as the city densifies toward 104, we will be stuck with rather large developments that are suburban in nature. We don't necessarily need to wait until the south side is the 'Next Short North' before we ask for urban oriented development and not this stuff that belongs in exurbs. And that's the thing with Columbus. We look so singularly at individual projects that we lose the potential long term impacts. Even in these forums so much gets written off as 'its fine. Its just THIS location or THIS project' but when you continue to add it up, it's those allowances time and time again. It really isn't that hard or outlandish to expect better of our city and developers that will be better in the long run as we hurdle toward that 2050. We have to stop acting like anything inside 270 can be written of as 'better than nothing'. If we set the precedent to expect better we will get better.
April 25, 20232 yr 6 minutes ago, DTCL11 said: It really isn't that hard or outlandish to expect better of our city and developers that will be better in the long run as we hurdle toward that 2050. We have to stop acting like anything inside 270 can be written of as 'better than nothing'. If we set the precedent to expect better we will get better. When you have a blighted space that has no improvement and is not generating tax revenue for the city and you have a developer willing to invest their money and resources to make an improvement to the community that will bring jobs, much needed housing to the area, increased property taxes for the schools, and increased income tax base for the community, then yes, while the community is welcome to include a certain level of input into the project, in the end they ultimately need to shut their mouths and take the improvement that will come from the property because at the end of the day, they really have no money at risk in the project and the project will be an improvement for the community over what is already there.
April 25, 20232 yr I know this will be kind of controversial, but had anyone asked the people who need affordable housing about what kind of housing they want...if they care whether or not if it has a more urban or more suburban layout? If they would prefer something more urban, than that would be something to take to the city and the commissioners. I wonder how one would even go about founding/finding out about that information. *I kind of cringe at this question wondering if the poorer residents are just as suburban minded as so many others and would actually want the sea of parking lots.
April 25, 20232 yr 19 minutes ago, Toddguy said: I know this will be kind of controversial, but had anyone asked the people who need affordable housing about what kind of housing they want...if they care whether or not if it has a more urban or more suburban layout? If they would prefer something more urban, than that would be something to take to the city and the commissioners. I wonder how one would even go about founding/finding out about that information. *I kind of cringe at this question wondering if the poorer residents are just as suburban minded as so many others and would actually want the sea of parking lots. I get your point on asking, but in the end urban development is better for affordability because it puts people closer to everything they need. Cars are insanely expensive and can be a hinderance for many people. Being close enough to groceries, jobs and anything else is cheaper and easier for the city to help with affordability. When someone can walk to the store or jump on the bus for a quick 5 minute ride, it’s easier for them. Edited April 25, 20232 yr by VintageLife
April 25, 20232 yr Work is well underway on all fourteen apartment buildings planned for the Buckstone Flats portion of the site, across from HTHS Crews were also pouring more roads throughout the site yesterday as well.
April 25, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Toddguy said: I know this will be kind of controversial, but had anyone asked the people who need affordable housing about what kind of housing they want...if they care whether or not if it has a more urban or more suburban layout? If they would prefer something more urban, than that would be something to take to the city and the commissioners. I wonder how one would even go about founding/finding out about that information. *I kind of cringe at this question wondering if the poorer residents are just as suburban minded as so many others and would actually want the sea of parking lots. I do not think housing is built for the affordable renter in mind. It fits the higher end renter typically and then after years of wear and tear moves into the affordable category. Any affordable housing projects are built with a lot of subsidies so they are probably driven by median neighborhood value to qualify for such subsidies. I do not think the needs of the affordable renter rank high in priority. At the same time, I think the biggest priorities for affordable renters are 1) affordability, 2) ability to get to and from work (if they work). They do not really worry about amenities and those issues. Certainly, they want a clean place but outside of that, I do not think other features come into play
April 25, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said: When you have a blighted space that has no improvement and is not generating tax revenue for the city and you have a developer willing to invest their money and resources to make an improvement to the community that will bring jobs, much needed housing to the area, increased property taxes for the schools, and increased income tax base for the community, then yes, while the community is welcome to include a certain level of input into the project, in the end they ultimately need to shut their mouths and take the improvement that will come from the property because at the end of the day, they really have no money at risk in the project and the project will be an improvement for the community over what is already there. But the city can and should put the demands on it and property owners shouldn't be able to put whatever they want wherever they want all in the name of 'it's better than what's there'. Not that hard. Cities do it all the time. We have those expectations in plenty of places. We discuss materials, and balconies, etc all day for things in hot neighborhoods. The same should be applied elswhere. Columbus just needs to do it more and more consistently across more of the core. Easy as that. The idea that property owners should be able to do whatever, wherever as long as it's a net benefit of some sort is a farce. The city and commissions failing to push for better is just as detrimental as preventing good urban development. Especially when the consideration being asked is simply a reorganization of the sites to promote a better urban environment and potential future land use if the opportunity were to arise. That in no way is the same as demanding more units or a tower or a garage or other things we do regularly talk about here for many projects. But by golly, rearranging a site... too far! It's not your money! These developments ringed with parking lots have no place inside the loop. Most would balk at it in Franklinton, many would criticize the hell out of it in Clintonville, just about everyone would scream if it were downtown. I doubt this many commentors would be 'well, at least its another parking lot gone' if it wasnt fronting the street or arranged to allow future expansion if it was on Long Street. Remember how frustrating it was and still is that the Hyatt on third has a parking garage fronting the street and a massive parking lot. That we spent alot of time discussing that the parking should be buried or at least behind the Hyatt? That the Nicholas also has all sorts of dead street front on Long St? In the long term vision of the city, we should be doing the same even for these outlying areas of the core. The idea that 'it's just an old dilapidated part of town so be happy it gets anything' is on the verge of discrimatory. Expecting and wanting the best for higher value neighborhoods but meh, it's the Southside, they'll get what they can get. And that's the consistent difference. I'm not willing to write off any part of town for poor development concepts simply because its not the prime areas. Again, if we spend so much time excusing case by case that we have more excuses in the end than not. How many exceptions for this reason or that before the exceptions become the rule. And upon second glance, I got Rice Bowl and the one to the south mixed up. At least the Rice Bowl building fronts the street. The one between Dering and Fornoff is terrible as well.
April 25, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, DTCL11 said: But the city can and should put the demands on it and property owners shouldn't be able to put whatever they want wherever they want all in the name of 'it's better than what's there'. Not that hard. Cities do it all the time. We have those expectations in plenty of places. We discuss materials, and balconies, etc all day for things in hot neighborhoods. The same should be applied elswhere. Columbus just needs to do it more and more consistently across more of the core. Easy as that. The idea that property owners should be able to do whatever, wherever as long as it's a net benefit of some sort is a farce. The connotations you're making about "whatever, wherever" make it sound like we're putting up oil refineries and fireworks stores. A project like this lacking urbanity is not a negative in my mind, it's just a project that's not fully maximizing its positives. I'm all for redesigning the layout as it's not something I'm in love with. But at the end of the day, I think the real question boils down to: If the developer refuses to amend the project in the name of urbanity, is it worth rejecting the proposal? Is it worth rejecting the proposal when future interest in this particular parcel is uncertain and it may be years (and potential pandemics or recessions later) before something ever comes down the pipeline again? I know we can have the optimism living in Columbus but you just never know what state's/country's/world's future holds. Call me skeptic, I just see little potential in this individual site, even though I want to. But while some see a precedent and what we allow getting built, I see that getting something--even a plan as that--develops momentum that can inspire bigger and greater things to carry forward.
April 26, 20232 yr Work continues on the first two buildings up at the Columbus Castings site And a quick one of the third, and largest of the three warehouses being built on site:
May 1, 20232 yr Newly completed Rickenbacker-area warehouse represents first phase of Rickenbacker Industrial Center project “A 1 million-square-foot warehouse has been completed at a new industrial park near Rickenbacker International Airport. Developers Trident Capital Group and The O'Connor Group constructed the industrial building on 60 acres at the intersection of Rohr Road and Lockbourne Road. The warehouse features 40-foot clear height, 104 docks, four drive-in doors, a 347-space parking lot and 9,827 square feet of office space split between two different office suites. The property is located in an opportunity zone in the Rickenbacker submarket. It is near Rickenbacker International Airport and Norfolk Southern Intermodal Yard, and is in proximity to Interstate 270 and U.S. 23. The facility represents the first phase of a multi-building, master-planned development called Rickenbacker Industrial Center. The scope of the project is 3.67 million square feet of industrial space on 230 acres.“ https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/05/01/rickenbacker-industrial-center-phase-one-complete.html
May 2, 20232 yr On 4/26/2023 at 12:43 PM, CbusOrBust said: Work continues on the first two buildings up at the Columbus Castings site And a quick one of the third, and largest of the three warehouses being built on site: Drove by this site with my wife the other day. She said it would be a great site for a bunch of big movie studios, which I would have to agree with. I would love to see a push for something like that in the Columbus area. the central location is great because it’s pretty quick access to Cleveland, cinci and Pittsburgh, if dense city scenes are needed. We have plenty of colleges that could up their film production departments to get more people into film. I think a spot down in the obetz area would be better. Those studios require 100’s of acres. Edited May 2, 20232 yr by VintageLife
May 2, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, VintageLife said: Drove by this site with my wife the other day. She said it would be a great site for a bunch of big movie studios, which I would have to agree with. I would love to see a push for something like that in the Columbus area. the central location is great because it’s pretty quick access to Cleveland, cinci and Pittsburgh, if dense city scenes are needed. We have plenty of colleges that could up their film production departments to get more people into film. I think a spot down in the obetz area would be better. Those studios require 100’s of acres. Columbus Underground has an article recently about what this city needs to attract/create a thriving film industry. I only skimmed it, not something I'm particularly interested in, but maybe some others here will enjoy the read. This was published just a couple weeks back as well so it's recent. https://columbusunderground.com/what-does-central-ohio-need-for-a-thriving-film-industry-jd1/
Create an account or sign in to comment