Jump to content

Featured Replies

I see a lot more gaps left to fill!

  • Replies 847
  • Views 102.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

2 hours ago, TIm said:

I see a lot more gaps left to fill!

I’m not confident they will ever get filled at least not in my lifetime but I will try to remain optimistic!

27 minutes ago, 614love said:

I’m not confident they will ever get filled at least not in my lifetime but I will try to remain optimistic!

I think the next 10-15 years will be a huge difference 

13 hours ago, 614love said:

I’m not confident they will ever get filled at least not in my lifetime but I will try to remain optimistic!

I've seen so much change in my 6 short years in Ohio, I'm pretty optimistic over here! I have no reason to believe they'd all of a sudden stop now, especially with all the money that'll be coming to Central Ohio and Columbus.

16 hours ago, TIm said:

I see a lot more gaps left to fill!

Look for progress instead of perfection. We have more buildings over 100 meters being built now than since the late 80's early 90's- in over 30 years. And again, it should not be about height, but density, livability, walkability, transit, etc.-so many more important things. "Skylines" are just gravy really. I love skyscrapers myself but perspective is needed-especially when you love skyscrapers. 

 

I want people to drive/walk/bike/take mass transit through downtown and see lots of mixed use buildings, people, activity, transit as in light rail/streetcars/better advanced busses-and very few surface parking lots. The real difference is on the ground, not seen in a view.

1 hour ago, Toddguy said:

Look for progress instead of perfection. We have more buildings over 100 meters being built now than since the late 80's early 90's- in over 30 years. And again, it should not be about height, but density, livability, walkability, transit, etc.-so many more important things. "Skylines" are just gravy really. I love skyscrapers myself but perspective is needed-especially when you love skyscrapers. 

 

I want people to drive/walk/bike/take mass transit through downtown and see lots of mixed use buildings, people, activity, transit as in light rail/streetcars/better advanced busses-and very few surface parking lots. The real difference is on the ground, not seen in a view.

We can want all those things all at the same time!

4 minutes ago, TIm said:

We can want all those things all at the same time!

I agree 100%!!  In my view, i would love just one...just one...really tall/high profile skyscraper to be the focal point of downtown, just to break up the skyline that is all relatively the same height....then density all around it!! 

36 minutes ago, OhioFinest said:

I agree 100%!!  In my view, i would love just one...just one...really tall/high profile skyscraper to be the focal point of downtown, just to break up the skyline that is all relatively the same height....then density all around it!! 

I second that notion!

2 hours ago, TIm said:

We can want all those things all at the same time!

The height is gravy as I said. But if gravy happens to be on the menu, I will be very happy and not turn it down! Gravy is good lol. Gravy can be desired and requested of course. Why not? We can still push for the gravy too-but just not get to the point of a Jman where we are posting pics of Austin or Nashville(and ignoring the skylines of other peer cities like KS, San Antonio, Sacramento, Portland, Indy, Baltimore, etc. etc. )and whining and other such bulls**t.

Postcard buildings are pretty on postcards.  It's the street level activity that brings the sidewalks to life.  Take a look at Boston, MA, a city that's never been known for multiple skyscrapers (Prudential being the most known building).  Yet, you go to many of their urban neighborhoods filled with 4-6 floor buildings and the pedestrian activity is what makes the city memorable.

2 hours ago, Scott Krajeski said:

Postcard buildings are pretty on postcards.  It's the street level activity that brings the sidewalks to life.  Take a look at Boston, MA, a city that's never been known for multiple skyscrapers (Prudential being the most known building).  Yet, you go to many of their urban neighborhoods filled with 4-6 floor buildings and the pedestrian activity is what makes the city memorable.

Boston is a VERY unique American city though. It's not even worth comparing Boston urban development to other cities in the US, especially midwestern cities that weren't even founded until the 1800s. Boston had almost 200 years of development at this point. They deal with a lot more variables when considering new builds that just aren't applicable in the majority of the US. Also been building tall a lot in recent years and there are no signs of that stopping.

32 minutes ago, TIm said:

Boston is a VERY unique American city though. It's not even worth comparing Boston urban development to other cities in the US, especially midwestern cities that weren't even founded until the 1800s. Boston had almost 200 years of development at this point. They deal with a lot more variables when considering new builds that just aren't applicable in the majority of the US. Also been building tall a lot in recent years and there are no signs of that stopping.

 

Ok, so compare the Short North to Broad Street or High Street downtown. One area has nothing over 12-stories tall (mostly under 6 stories) while the other area contains the largest number of 500'+ tall towers in the entire state. Which area is more popular? Which area is a more pleasant pedestrian experience? Which area do people prefer to live? Which area do tourists spend their time in?

 

 

9 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Ok, so compare the Short North to Broad Street or High Street downtown. One area has nothing over 12-stories tall (mostly under 6 stories) while the other area contains the largest number of 500'+ tall towers in the entire state. Which area is more popular? Which area is a more pleasant pedestrian experience? Which area do people prefer to live? Which area do tourists spend their time in?

 

 

Those areas of the city serve entirely different main purposes. One is geared much more towards the 8-5 M-F working crowd and the other is a "live and play" type neighborhood designed to have an active pedestrian streetscape. I'm not sure what there is to compare. I've had no issues being a pedestrian in either personally. But if by "popular" you mean which area has more people moving in and out the most frequently, it's downtown not the short north. That's like trying to compare the popularity of Soccer to Football in the US, "popular" is an arbitrary measurement. Both can be "popular" while also having huge disparities in the amount of fans as an example. I'd also imagine the permanent resident population of the two areas is very comparable.

Edited by TIm

Ah. Like the sands of time, we will waste away discussing the merits of skylines and density...

 

[Insert dead horse gif] 

 

So, about the Hilton Tower, looking great with most of the cladding and glass up, eh? 

 

😉

15 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

Ah. Like the sands of time, we will waste away discussing the merits of skylines and density...

 

[Insert dead horse gif] 

 

So, about the Hilton Tower, looking great with most of the cladding and glass up, eh? 

 

😉

Yes it is looking good. And I have not been down there recently but from the pics it seems to go very well with the buildings surrounding it. It fits in well. I cannot wait for Market Tower(and any other big time developments).  

Interesting moment at High and Nationwide where the Hilton 2.0 and the Hyatt visually fit together...

 

IMG_3669.JPG

  • Author

They REALLY need to reclad that Hyatt.

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

13 minutes ago, ColDayMan said:

They REALLY need to reclad that Hyatt.

I think just painting a mural on the concrete would make a huge difference, but the the glass needs replaced also. 

Time to start over on the Hyatt. Terrible urban form and one of the ugliest buildings in Ohio. 

I like it but I have bad taste.

I actually like it far better than the Rhodes Tower

30 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

I like it but I have bad taste.

I think it looks cool, it has a unique design that I can appreciate.

12 minutes ago, PrestoKinetic said:

I actually like it far better than the Rhodes Tower


Whoever designed Rhodes must have taken inspiration from a filing cabinet. It’s terrible. 

Edited by CBUS_Res

44 minutes ago, CBUS_Res said:


Whoever designed Rhodes must have taken inspiration from a filing cabinet. It’s terrible. 

If you think of state employees as files it basically is just a giant filing cabinet.

3 hours ago, CBUS_Res said:


Whoever designed Rhodes must have taken inspiration from a filing cabinet. It’s terrible. 

Brubaker/Brandt, Inc.
Dalton, Dalton, Little, and Newport

 

Neither are around anymore, but Brubaker was the architect for Motorists Mutual, the Continental Center, the Bricker federal building, One Nationwide and the Police HQ in Columbus, besides Rhodes.  They all have... shall we say, a certain aesthetic.  For Dalton, Rhodes was the only Columbus building they were involved in, but they did like half a dozen in Cleveland.  

 

The early 1970s wasn't a great time for architecture.

Edited by jonoh81

Wasn’t Rhodes tower supposed to be taller and that’s why it has the weird shape on the roof? I thought I read that somewhere. 

1 minute ago, WagChase said:

Wasn’t Rhodes tower supposed to be taller and that’s why it has the weird shape on the roof? I thought I read that somewhere. 

 

Yes, it was supposed to be 150ft taller.  

11 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Yes, it was supposed to be 150ft taller.  

 

I dont know if I am happy or sad it isn't taller. Like taller would be nice but also more of that tower may not be nice.

 

Truly mixed feelings. 

Posted originally by @DTCL11in a different thread. The Hilton looks so tiny - wish it was more Nationwide height. Hope North Market tower gives us the size we want in that area.... lots of potential! spacer.png

Have no idea how to upload images but here's an idea of some current towers going in and where other larger developments could go. Parking garages are in blue. Really think there's a lot of potential in the convention center area that needs to be utilized. 

 

https://pasteboard.co/bUNgiHCXcpJ1.png

47 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

Have no idea how to upload images but here's an idea of some current towers going in and where other larger developments could go. Parking garages are in blue. Really think there's a lot of potential in the convention center area that needs to be utilized. 

 

https://pasteboard.co/bUNgiHCXcpJ1.png

 

Also there's a lot more potential in the northwestern quadrant of the Arena District along Convention Center Drive, Vine and Spruce!

20 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Yes, it was supposed to be 150ft taller.  

I have heard this frequently but I have never seen anything that is actual proof of this. I went back into the Dispatch archives before this was built and there was nothing about it being significantly taller. Can you link to anything that actually states this was supposed to be that high and is an actual source from that time and not just speculation/a blog/?

 

I have heard this for decades and also that was the explanation for the weirdo stick-topped northeast side being the way it is. But I have yet to see concrete proof from that time that it was supposed to be 750 feet. I have not been able to find it.

3 hours ago, columbus17 said:

Posted originally by @DTCL11in a different thread. The Hilton looks so tiny - wish it was more Nationwide height. Hope North Market tower gives us the size we want in that area...

Also, welcome Columbus17!  I see it's your very first post!

1 hour ago, Toddguy said:

I have heard this frequently but I have never seen anything that is actual proof of this. I went back into the Dispatch archives before this was built and there was nothing about it being significantly taller. Can you link to anything that actually states this was supposed to be that high and is an actual source from that time and not just speculation/a blog/?

 

I have heard this for decades and also that was the explanation for the weirdo stick-topped northeast side being the way it is. But I have yet to see concrete proof from that time that it was supposed to be 750 feet. I have not been able to find it.

Yeah, you'd think there'd be an article with renderings of the "State Offices Building" before it was built. I couldn't find anything quickly last night either.

1 hour ago, Toddguy said:

I have heard this frequently but I have never seen anything that is actual proof of this. I went back into the Dispatch archives before this was built and there was nothing about it being significantly taller. Can you link to anything that actually states this was supposed to be that high and is an actual source from that time and not just speculation/a blog/?

 

I have heard this for decades and also that was the explanation for the weirdo stick-topped northeast side being the way it is. But I have yet to see concrete proof from that time that it was supposed to be 750 feet. I have not been able to find it.

The only thing I found was on Wiki. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_State_Office_Tower

2 hours ago, WagChase said:

The only thing I found was on Wiki. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_State_Office_Tower

Yeah and that has (citation needed). I might look some more. It really is perplexing that the top of the building, mainly the northeast corner, is so weird-I cannot believe they planned that. There has to be at least an explanation of why the top is so awful and exceptionally ugly, and I kind of want to know what the reason is. The top is the worst of any tall building in the city. The top makes it look unfinished.

Edited by Toddguy
dementia

 

I did some digging and put together my findings in the Capital Square thread so as to not take up too much space here. 

 

Short Answer: nope. It was always supposed to be that tall and that way. 

 

 

Snapped this tonight. 

F585A2BB-E210-4E0F-88AF-A1D1DE05EA62.jpeg

On 3/24/2022 at 3:20 PM, PrestoKinetic said:

Also, welcome Columbus17!  I see it's your very first post!

I've been following this forum for a while but as I've started getting jobs/connections with big developers in Columbus, I figured it was time to join and contribute myself.

On 3/26/2022 at 8:08 PM, Kriegs said:

Snapped this tonight. 

F585A2BB-E210-4E0F-88AF-A1D1DE05EA62.jpeg

It actually looks good with the Hyatt. That area of the city is really looking good!

13 hours ago, columbus17 said:

I've started getting jobs/connections with big developers in Columbus

 

Does this mean you are going to get us the inside scoop on big projects? 😃

9 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Does this mean you are going to get us the inside scoop on big projects? 😃

I don't know what you would call "big," certainly not this size - but I do know of things on the smaller scale.

10 hours ago, columbus17 said:

I don't know what you would call "big," certainly not this size - but I do know of things on the smaller scale.

Spill the beans!

  • 3 weeks later...

Hilton Tower from Goodale Park a few weeks ago. Looking good!

 

Goodale Park

 

On 4/13/2022 at 11:27 AM, cbussoccer said:

Hilton Tower from Goodale Park a few weeks ago. Looking good!

 

Goodale Park

 

Why does it look so much like the height of Nationwide? We really need another 500' tower

14 hours ago, columbus17 said:

Why does it look so much like the height of Nationwide? We really need another 500' tower

I’ll raise you 5-8 more please.

Edited by 614love

Snapped this from outside north market, 

275D91EE-D201-46F9-A09C-6D2B1BCBDE1B.jpeg

Marilyn Monroe didn't get as many pictures taken of her as this Hilton has.

9 minutes ago, John7165 said:

Marilyn Monroe didn't get as many pictures taken of her as this Hilton has.

Just wait until we get to ogle the North Market Tower. And if we get another 500 footer plus, forget about it-More viewing/pics than Marilyn,  and Betty Grable and Rita Hayworth during the war combined. 

 

We have been starved for tall Cbus building p0rn. Also don't forget the OSU Medical tower-we love us some tall elevator shaft p0rn! lol.

9 minutes ago, Toddguy said:

Just wait until we get to ogle the North Market Tower. And if we get another 500 footer plus, forget about it-More viewing/pics than Marilyn,  and Betty Grable and Rita Hayworth during the war combined. 

 

We have been starved for tall Cbus building p0rn. Also don't forget the OSU Medical tower-we love us some tall elevator shaft p0rn! lol.

Everything will really come together once we are able to get photos of North Market Tower from the top of the Hilton and vice versa.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.