2 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

 

That's what I mean and my point of reference for my comment.  I'll be upset since that's some of the options. In the meantime, the AD to Peninsula bridge concept that the city has included in every master plan for over 20 years falls off the wayside so we can better connect blocks of government offices and corporate offices instead of finally prioritizing connection the highest concentrations of residential develop and regional attractions. I feel like these don't appropriately take in to account Link US. Notice that all these have buses mixed with traffic but LinkUS specifies West Broad should have dedicated median downtown to Hilltop and then mixed traffic past Hilltop. So these two proposals aren't cohesive. 

 

Also, I'd love this to include artwork under the bridges. The board street bridge already has preformed areas perfect for murals at the minimum if not hanging sculptures. 

The Neil / North Bank to Peninsula pedestrian bridge always seems like it makes the most sense.  Could be complicated with the train bridge, but still achievable if it's a priority.

19 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

 

That's what I mean and my point of reference for my comment.  I'll be upset since that's some of the options. In the meantime, the AD to Peninsula bridge concept that the city has included in every master plan for over 20 years falls off the wayside so we can better connect blocks of government offices and corporate offices instead of finally prioritizing connection the highest concentrations of residential develop and regional attractions. I feel like these don't appropriately take in to account Link US. Notice that all these have buses mixed with traffic but LinkUS specifies West Broad should have dedicated median downtown to Hilltop and then mixed traffic past Hilltop. So these two proposals aren't cohesive. 

 

Also, I'd love this to include artwork under the bridges. The board street bridge already has preformed areas perfect for murals at the minimum if not hanging sculptures. 

 

I didn't even think about LinkUS, but you're right. I don't see how that part of Broad and the bridge could see any significant road diet with expanded pedestrianization and also have dedicated transit lanes. That means that the options are that the bridge would have to be expanded for all the intended plans, the pedestrianization plans would have to be drastically reduced to resemble nothing like the renderings, an actual separate pedestrian bridge would need to be constructed, or the dedicated lanes on this part of Broad would have to be scrapped. 

The favored plan shows neither a bridge expansion nor separate bridge, so the other two bad options are all that are left. 

Edited May 23, 20241 yr by jonoh81

23 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

I didn't even think about LinkUS, but you're right. I don't see how that part of Broad and the bridge could see any significant road diet with expanded pedestrianization and also have dedicated transit lanes. That means that the options are that the bridge would have to be expanded for all the intended plans, the pedestrianization plans would have to be drastically reduced to resemble nothing like the renderings, an actual separate pedestrian bridge would need to be constructed, or the dedicated lanes on this part of Broad would have to be scrapped. 

The favored plan shows neither a bridge expansion nor separate bridge, so the other two bad options are all that are left. 

I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "The traffic on Broad St Downtown was terrible!". The only section of Broad St that's routinely packed is the section on E Broad from 270 past Mt Carmel East to Wagoner Rd. 

On 5/23/2024 at 2:30 PM, jonoh81 said:

 

I didn't even think about LinkUS, but you're right. I don't see how that part of Broad and the bridge could see any significant road diet with expanded pedestrianization and also have dedicated transit lanes. That means that the options are that the bridge would have to be expanded for all the intended plans, the pedestrianization plans would have to be drastically reduced to resemble nothing like the renderings, an actual separate pedestrian bridge would need to be constructed, or the dedicated lanes on this part of Broad would have to be scrapped. 

The favored plan shows neither a bridge expansion nor separate bridge, so the other two bad options are all that are left. 

 

The rendering snipped below of the preferred concept clearly shows two travel lanes maintained in both directions, even with additional landscaping, wide multi-use paths, seating, and a median. Two of the four travel lanes could easily be striped as bus only without any need to expand the bridge - it really is that wide (er, Broad) as it exists currently

 

21 minutes ago, NW24HX said:

 

The rendering snipped below of the preferred concept clearly shows two travel lanes maintained in both directions, even with additional landscaping, wide multi-use paths, seating, and a median. Two of the four travel lanes could easily be striped as bus only without any need to expand the bridge - it really is that wide (er, Broad) as it exists currently

 

That’s what I was thinking—Broad, including its bridge, is huge, so I really didn’t understand the hand wringing over it. In addition to all the lanes of travel for cars, the sidewalks on both sides are already incredibly wide too. There’s room for everything planned and then some. 
 

Once everything starts coming into place—LinkUS, Cap Line, additional SP dev, etc.—I really think Broad needs to be reduced to one lane of travel in both directions, at least from Gravity to High, plus other traffic calming, like raised crosswalks and/or additional speed bumps. There’s going to be waaaay too much going on in that area from a pedestrian and dev standpoint to continue to allow cars to blast through at 50+ MPH. Otherwise, there’s going to be a lot more pedestrian v. car and storefront v car incidents. If folks want to speed past this area, they need to find a different route. 
 

Also, I really want to see an SP-AD connector, but I really don’t believe we’re going to see that happen until development moves into the north parking lot, beside Vets. Right now, there’s just not enough on the SP side to justify it, in my mind. 

1 hour ago, amped91 said:

That’s what I was thinking—Broad, including its bridge, is huge, so I really didn’t understand the hand wringing over it. In addition to all the lanes of travel for cars, the sidewalks on both sides are already incredibly wide too. There’s room for everything planned and then some. 
 

Once everything starts coming into place—LinkUS, Cap Line, additional SP dev, 

 

The hand wringing isn't that it is not possible. It that we don't trust the leaders. In many ways, the city gets in its own way. So when it come to the city taking this seriously, we KNOW they could go to one lane, but I'd put alot of money on them having far more excuses was to why it isn't, not to mention the state having its say since it is a state route etc. 

 

Heck, LinkUs already plan on shared lane use in far west broad instead of dedicated lanes and islands where broad is the absolutely widest so my guess is where broad faces a choice like this, we will see far more mixed lanes than we should. 

Edited May 25, 20241 yr by DTCL11

Lol I was responding to a post directly quoting hand-wringing about the bridge needing expanded or a second bridge needing built, yet you’re still able to find something to mansplain 🙃

On 5/25/2024 at 8:34 AM, NW24HX said:

 

The rendering snipped below of the preferred concept clearly shows two travel lanes maintained in both directions, even with additional landscaping, wide multi-use paths, seating, and a median. Two of the four travel lanes could easily be striped as bus only without any need to expand the bridge - it really is that wide (er, Broad) as it exists currently

 

 

I think the question was whether the LinkUS route was going to be mixed-traffic or dedicated-lane here, and this obviously suggests mixed-traffic. Which again, if it's mixed-traffic, that would undermine the point of BRT, even if only for a short distance. And I think that by trying to force everything onto the existing bridge to save money- even as wide as it is- you still end up having to sacrifice something. I'd rather that sacrifice that not be transit effectiveness because we need these routes to essentially overperform if we're going to keep expanding options. A significant portion of the Broad route is already going to be mixed-traffic as it is. 

Edited May 27, 20241 yr by jonoh81

On 5/25/2024 at 10:50 AM, DTCL11 said:

 

The hand wringing isn't that it is not possible. It that we don't trust the leaders. In many ways, the city gets in its own way. So when it come to the city taking this seriously, we KNOW they could go to one lane, but I'd put alot of money on them having far more excuses was to why it isn't, not to mention the state having its say since it is a state route etc. 

 

Heck, LinkUs already plan on shared lane use in far west broad instead of dedicated lanes and islands where broad is the absolutely widest so my guess is where broad faces a choice like this, we will see far more mixed lanes than we should. 

 

Exactly. I am concerned that LinkUS routes are already getting watered down over time and we have too many people making excuses. Yes, we want a nicer, more interactive and pedestrian friendly waterfront and Downtown, but we should also have an effective transit system. If that transit system is to be BRT, then it should be of a high standard and not something closer to CMAX. We can have both, and we shouldn't accept less than both, or only the cheapest possible versions of both. I'd much rather see one done right than both wrong. 

Edited May 27, 20241 yr by jonoh81

It looks like things are in motion for the Capital Line project.

 

https://portal.columbus.gov/Permits/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Engineering&TabName=Engineering&capID1=24CIP&capID2=00000&capID3=00016&agencyCode=COLUMBUS&IsToShowInspection=

New Capital Line Renderings Released Ahead of Public Meeting

 

 

Design work has progressed on the Capital Line, the two-mile bike and pedestrian loop Downtown that was first announced in February.

 

Downtown Columbus, Inc (DCI) and the City of Columbus today released new renderings showing a redesigned Gay Street on either side of High Street, and the group will be hosting a public meeting at 5 p.m. this evening at Downtown Innovation Lab, 139 S. High St.

 

The overall concept remains the same as the one unveiled earlier this year – a pathway that will run along Gay, Fourth and Rich Streets and across the Broad and Town Street bridges to the Scioto Peninsula. Gay Street will be the first leg of the path completed.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/new-capital-line-renderings-released-ahead-of-public-meeting-bw1/

 

 

I wish the Pearl Alley glow up from years ago was part of this. 

40 minutes ago, DTCL11 said:

I wish the Pearl Alley glow up from years ago was part of this. 

 

I've always thought downtown Columbus' alleyways are an opportunity to create something unique in the downtown core. Many of them are no longer of much use as car thoroughfares and could be repurposed as unique "hole in the wall" spots for pop-up food service, art spaces, and other small-scale creative elements. We have seen this to some extent along Pearl Alley and, more recently, Cherry St. But a more concentrated effort involving Lynn, Wall, Lazelle, Elm, Young, etc. would be fantastic.

14 minutes ago, CMHOhio said:

 

I've always thought downtown Columbus' alleyways are an opportunity to create something unique in the downtown core. Many of them are no longer of much use as car thoroughfares and could be repurposed as unique "hole in the wall" spots for pop-up food service, art spaces, and other small-scale creative elements. We have seen this to some extent along Pearl Alley and, more recently, Cherry St. But a more concentrated effort involving Lynn, Wall, Lazelle, Elm, Young, etc. would be fantastic.

There’s a whole bar area in downtown Detroit called the Belt that’s exactly this. It’s awesome. The bars are all in an alley and it’s pedestrian only and open container, so it’s basically several bars all connected in one Biergarten. 

Downtown Columbus' Capital Line moves forward with new renderings, public meeting

 

Columbus' forthcoming Capital Line project takes a step forward with new renderings and a public meeting Wednesday.

 

Downtown Columbus Inc. hired engineering and design teams WSP USA Inc. and MKSK to design and construct the new 2-mile urban pathway.

 

The Capital Line was announced in February. The loop would run from the Gay Street District, over the Broad Street bridge to The Peninsula, to Belle Street, over the Rich Street bridge and along Rich Street then along 4th Street, connecting back with Gay Street. Work will start on Gay Street first.

 

"We know the people are there, they're patronizing the restaurants and retail," said Amy Taylor, president of Downtown Columbus Inc. "The Capital Line is going on a street that is already bursting with people, residents, workers. Adding the Capital Line on top of all of that is going to transform one of the best streets in Columbus into a community gem."

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/11/20/capital-line.html

 

 

A little more from the Dispatch...

 

Downtown's Capital Line eyes Gay Street for phase one of $100 million pedestrian project

 

"The Capital Line, the ambitious $100-million "urban pathway" planned in downtown Columbus, is moving forward with a makeover of a stretch of Gay Street, including outdoor seating, greenery, walkways and performance space.

 

Announced in February, the path would loop two miles along Gay, Rich and 4th streets before crossing the Scioto River and closing the loop on Belle Street in Franklinton. Ranging from about 12 feet to nearly 29 feet wide, including landscaping, the pathway would replace what is now street space, including parking lanes.

 

MKSK and WSP released renderings this week showing the first, and most ambitious, phase of the project on Gay Street from North 4th Street to Front Street, where the Capital Line will be incorporated into a planned overhaul of the street.

 

While all of Gay Street will be updated, the Capital Line will occupy nearly 29 feet on the south side of the street, where parking spaces will be replaced with planters, seats, trees and a walking and biking lane.

 

Utility work is expected to begin late next summer on the project, followed by above-ground work by the end of 2025, with a goal of completing the project by the end of 2026 or early 2027. 

 

Gay Street will be the first of four phases of Capital Line work. The next phase will be either 4th Street or along Marconi Boulevard and West Broad Street over the river."

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/local/2024/11/20/columbus-downtown-capital-line-project-to-begin-in-2025-on-gay-street/76407795007/

 

 

 

 

Scheduled for Columbus City Council meeting Monday, February 3, 2025

 

Advancing the Capital Line Project

 

Councilmember Lourdes Barroso de Padilla is sponsoring ordinance 0141-2025, which authorizes the Department of Public Service to partner with the Columbus Downtown Development Corporation (CDDC) for the Capital Line Project. This two-mile bike and pedestrian pathway along Gay, Fourth, and Rich Streets and across the Broad and Town Street bridges to the Scioto Peninsula will connect key downtown attractions, greenspaces, job centers, and residential areas while catalyzing new economic investment along the route.

 

City of Columbus, Downtown Columbus Inc. make partnership on Capital Line official

 

Columbus City Council Monday approved legislation to partner with Downtown Columbus Inc. for the Capital Line project.

 

Council Member Lourdes Barroso de Padilla sponsored the ordinance, which authorizes the Department of Public Service to partner with Downtown Columbus Inc. on the design and construction of the 2-mile pathway.

 

This was the legislation's second reading, moving the project another step closer to reality.

 

The first phase of the project will run along Gay Street from 4th Street to Front Street. Current plans show a curbless design on Gay Street from Wall Street to Pearl Alley, which designates it as a main event space for the Gay Street District, akin to a public plaza.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/02/04/capital-line-dci-city-partnership.html

 

I just took a walk along the river and there were so many people out doing the same. It was awesome to see. Obviously today being the first good weather we’ve had in a weekday in a bit helped, but still it was great to see. I’m excited to see how the Capital Line can enhance the river activation even more.

Here’s a pic that doesn’t really do it justice, there was a steady flow of people in every direction.

3 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

I just took a walk along the river and there were so many people out doing the same. It was awesome to see. Obviously today being the first good weather we’ve had in a weekday in a bit helped, but still it was great to see. I’m excited to see how the Capital Line can enhance the river activation even more.

Here’s a pic that doesn’t really do it justice, there was a steady flow of people in every direction.

Needs more trees! No such thing as too much shade in this weather 🤣

13 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

Needs more trees! No such thing as too much shade in this weather 🤣

I agree, I would love to see a massive amount of trees added

There's actually a decent amount of shade. The area in my picture above is probably the sunniest part of the riverfront. As the trees continue to mature, it will be even better. The peninsula side also seems to have more trees than the downtown side.

Also, if you walk along Civic Center Drive where they have all the swings/benches it's completely shaded. It's such a nice area to walk through.

21 hours ago, VintageLife said:

I agree, I would love to see a massive amount of trees added

Considering the Capital Line Plan linked earlier stated that the visibility of the river was crucial to the goals and branding of the project, they'll probably wouldn't plant too many trees to block the view. However, with that said, I would really like to see more benches, even if they're further up by Marconi where there's more shade.

On 6/2/2025 at 1:02 PM, cbussoccer said:

I just took a walk along the river and there were so many people out doing the same. It was awesome to see. Obviously today being the first good weather we’ve had in a weekday in a bit helped, but still it was great to see. I’m excited to see how the Capital Line can enhance the river activation even more.

Here’s a pic that doesn’t really do it justice, there was a steady flow of people in every direction.

Why do I feel like the environment looks real but the people look rendered? 😆

8 minutes ago, PrestoKinetic said:

Why do I feel like the environment looks real but the people look rendered? 😆

If those people are rendered, then I had a very trippy experience yesterday...