Jump to content

Featured Replies

17 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

The number of high quality buildings recently built in Columbus is very, very low. Step 1 is rule out anything stick framed...

 

Yep. Just because it's new does not mean it's quality, and just because something is old doesn't mean it's beyond saving and should be torn down. The value of architecture, over preservation and what should be preserved, is certainly subjective in many ways. But there's just no way that any of the 5-over-1s built in the city the last 10 years are still going to be here in 130 years like the SW building has lasted. I'd be surprised if many lasted half that long just from a quality standpoint. 

  • Replies 2.6k
  • Views 269.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • A little splash of color.   

  • NorthShore64
    NorthShore64

    McKinley Manor - 44 Unit Senior Housing Building (5-6-23)   Gates Junction Senior Housing   Franklinton Rising rehabs and new builds along Chicago Ave  

  • VintageLife
    VintageLife

    Kaufman is presenting their phase 3 of the gravity project at this months commission meeting. There haven’t been any picture updates, it looks the same as it has since the original conceptual design c

Posted Images

Spaghetti Warehouse Building: Board Weighs in on Demolition Request, Plans for Development

 

A request to demolish the former Spaghetti Warehouse building on West Broad Street was tabled by the Downtown Commission this morning. Although still likely to be torn down eventually, commissioners emphasized that precedent and the review board’s guidelines require a developer have concrete plans for a replacement building before being granted permission to tear one down.

 

Representatives of the Robert Weiler Company, including Chairman of the Board Bob Weiler, were on hand to discuss the project.

 

Weiler said that the ownership group – which includes the Kelley family (also longtime developers in Central Ohio) and the owners of the Spaghetti Warehouse restaurant chain – is pursuing a plan to build a seven-story building on the site. The new building would contain five floors of what he called affordable apartments above two floors of parking and retail space.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/spaghetti-warehouse-building-board-weighs-in-on-demolition-request-plans-for-development-bw1/

 

Spaghetti-Warehouse-Aug-24-1-1-696x464.j

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

I’m glad that this article mentioned it would still have a retail component. I still hate 7 stories and think it will be terrible overall. 

What a joke. According to the bizfirst article they haven't even repaired the roof yet... 2 1/2 years later...

 

They're intentionally letting a historic building rot so they can get away with demolition by neglect. This is the same old playbook we've seen in Columbus over and over again

 

And for what? A squat stick build over a concrete parking garage that I guarantee will be as bland and as cheap as they can make it. A complete disgrace

 

Edited by NW24HX

15 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

I think we've been on opposite ends of the preservation argument the vast majority of times. If you don't place any value in old or historic structures (there's not much difference in the terms, IMO), fine, but it just seems to me that when you make arguments that the city should be more careful regarding demolitions, that there's not really any intent or care to hold them accountable if they don't. It rings hollow. 

I would also not agree that most of the recent demolitions we've seen have necessarily led to better development. Some modern, cheaply constructed stuff that won't last nearly as long as what they replaced, or in some cases empty lots, but not a lot of what I would call high-quality replacements. 

Yes, I didn't understand your argument about the Dirty Frank's building when you argued for the demolition of arguably much nicer buildings, like the ones on High Street next to the old bank, or even Main Bar. And the SW building has significantly more potential overall than any of those. The SW building is arguably far more architecturally interesting and historic than either of the buildings proposed for demoltion for Estella. So that just seems a bit inconsistent to me.

And saving a facade is not building preservation anymore than saving a single archway from Union Station was. It's the "better than nothing" philosophy that I have come to despise regarding development attitudes in Columbus. That should not be our attitude. 

 

 

 

No we aren't always on opposite ends. You sometimes conflate me simply pointing out the realities of why a project is going to happen with me actually supporting a project. I live in the real world. I work in the financial world. I understand how businesses work. I accept reality even if I don't always like it. 

 

I'm not going to waste my time responding to every one of your critiques against me because, frankly, it's not worth my time or anyone else's time, and it won't accomplish anything. Argue all you want for preservation at all costs, that's fine stand to take, but don't come at people looking for arguments, especially when they happen to be largely on your side. 

12 hours ago, NW24HX said:

What a joke. According to the bizfirst article they haven't even repaired the roof yet... 2 1/2 years later...

 

They're intentionally letting a historic building rot so they can get away with demolition by neglect. This is the same old playbook we've seen in Columbus over and over again

 

And for what? A squat stick build over a concrete parking garage that I guarantee will be as bland and as cheap as they can make it. A complete disgrace

 

Could that be insurance related? Claim in limbo? 

 

Still, I 100% disapprove tearing this structure down for a bland 7 story building. Hell, the building won't have any view as the parking garage on the east side is 5 stories tall and the 12 story Gravity 2 on the west. Not to mention, a 7 story building can very easily sit on the parking lot facing either State St or Broad St and not even come close to touching Spaghetti Warehouse. 

If you visit cities like Cincinnati,  you will literally see buildings falling in to no repair and developers do wonders to turn these century old gems back to life! It can be done.  This is developers being cheap and lazy but obviously being more cheap with what they have to work with by just tearing down.  

 

 

I remember getting crushed over the original Greenhouse project because of the use of cheap materials. Glad to see others are finally coming around. The amount of intricate details on that thing wasn’t going to be able to be realized by a local developer. No offense to them because they’ve done great things in Franklinton but that’s rare.

16 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

 

No we aren't always on opposite ends. You sometimes conflate me simply pointing out the realities of why a project is going to happen with me actually supporting a project. I live in the real world. I work in the financial world. I understand how businesses work. I accept reality even if I don't always like it. 

 

I'm not going to waste my time responding to every one of your critiques against me because, frankly, it's not worth my time or anyone else's time, and it won't accomplish anything. Argue all you want for preservation at all costs, that's fine stand to take, but don't come at people looking for arguments, especially when they happen to be largely on your side. 

 

If your argument is that someone believing that historic preservation is both financially possible and architecturally preferable equates to somehow not living in or accepting reality, we are absolutely on opposite ends because that claim is ridiculous. And the idea that preservation cannot coincide with new development, let alone can't make for a good business decision, is also just going to be something we are opposites on. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by jonoh81

6 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

If your argument is that someone believing that historic preservation is both financially possible and architecturally preferable equates to somehow not living in or accepting reality, we are absolutely on opposite ends because that claim is ridiculous. And the idea that preservation cannot coincide with new development, let alone can't make for a good business decision, is also just going to be something we are opposites on. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


None of that is my argument. 

On 9/25/2024 at 10:55 AM, KyleofColumbus said:

Could that be insurance related? Claim in limbo? 

 

If they saw any value in the existing building, insurance delays wouldn't matter. It would be relatively easy and low cost to get a temporary fix/stabilization of the building in place. That would at least protect the asset while the claim is litigated. They haven't even patched the hole. They haven't even put a tarp up to keep the rain and snow out

 

What they have done is pay a roofer to say on record it's unsafe to even attempt a repair. Of course, you can pay someone to say just about anything (epecially if it gets them out of doing any actual work). I'm sure they will pay a structural engineer to arrive at their forgone conclusion that the building must be demolished immediately no ifs ands or buts 

 

I would propose that anyone requesting a demolition without a replacement use be required to pay the cost for the city to obtain a report on the building's structural integrity from an independent 3rd-party engineer

 

Where there's a will, there's a way. And here there are many ways available from full preservation to even a partial incorporation of the facade. The problem is there's no will to do anything. To even entertain the thought of saving just a portion of this historic building? No way! This quote from the Dispatch says it all, 

 

"I hope there's not a feeling already made up that we're going to have to save a portion of this building," he told commissioners. "As long as we're owners, that's not going to happen."

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/business/real-estate/2024/09/25/spaghetti-warehouse-building-demolish-plans-downtown-columbus-ohio/75374964007/

 

The developers don't care about this building. All they want is the land, and to put something up on it (eventually) that makes the maximum amount of money for the least amount of cost. Right now, that means a cheap, generic 5 over 2 - which is a complete waste of the potential of this site IMO. Highpoint 2: Electric Boogaloo

 

Edited by NW24HX

24 minutes ago, NW24HX said:

I would propose that anyone requesting a demolition without a replacement use be required to pay the cost for the city to obtain a report on the building's structural integrity from an independent 3rd-party engineer

 

 

That this isn't the policy is shocking. 

16 minutes ago, 17thState said:

That this isn't the policy is shocking. 

 

We can likely thank the big money developers (like Robert Weiler) funding Ginther & Co at city hall for that

Spaghetti Warehouse, Westrich & GreenHouse among Franklinton projects to watch

 

Columbus' oldest neighborhood continues to evolve with new development.

 

Where vacant warehouses or homes once stood in Franklinton, now apartments and retail are teeming with new life. And more change is coming to the neighborhood.

 

Here is a roundup of some projects to watch in Franklinton...

 

...below!

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/09/30/projects-to-watch-franklinton.html

 

greenhouse-2.jpg

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

  • 2 weeks later...

 

The old building at W Broad and N Gift is completely cleared.

Anyone know what is planned for this corner?

IMG_20241002_135055_8.thumb.jpg.733c2222a58f1e902b89405243adbd85.jpg

 

31 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said:

 

The old building at W Broad and N Gift is completely cleared.

Anyone know what is planned for this corner?

IMG_20241002_135055_8.thumb.jpg.733c2222a58f1e902b89405243adbd85.jpg

 

here is an article about it. I don’t remember seeing if it was approved or not, but hopefully it doesn’t just sit empty for years. 

550 W. Broad St.

Spaghetti Warehouse demolition to be heard again by Downtown Commission - Columbus Business First

 

spag*750xx2486-1398-0-1.jpg

 

The Downtown Commission next week will review a proposal to tear down the former restaurant building, temporarily replace it with a parking lot and then eventually redevelop it into two six-story buildings with 235 apartments, 182 surface parking spaces and about 7,000 square feet of commercial space.
 

"As the current owners of 397 W. Broad St., we would much prefer to save and restore the former Spaghetti Warehouse building, and would do so if it was economically feasible. Safety is the reason why we are demolishing this building," the statement read. "The city attorney’s office has sent us numerous requests to have the building removed as soon as possible."

Horrible waste of space and completely unimaginative. The commission will sadly say go ahead and build it, but my god what a joke

26 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Spaghetti Warehouse demolition to be heard again by Downtown Commission - Columbus Business First

 

spag*750xx2486-1398-0-1.jpg

 

The Downtown Commission next week will review a proposal to tear down the former restaurant building, temporarily replace it with a parking lot and then eventually redevelop it into two six-story buildings with 235 apartments, 182 surface parking spaces and about 7,000 square feet of commercial space.
 

"As the current owners of 397 W. Broad St., we would much prefer to save and restore the former Spaghetti Warehouse building, and would do so if it was economically feasible. Safety is the reason why we are demolishing this building," the statement read. "The city attorney’s office has sent us numerous requests to have the building removed as soon as possible."

Again, I can get these dudes a building 2-3 stories higher for the roughly the same cost. No need for a 6 story here.

A development better suited to replace a strip mall on Bethel road or something. Terrible use of space for this parcel, so unimaginative. Especially for a part of the city that has been exploding in popularity recently.

2 minutes ago, TIm said:

A development better suited to replace a strip mall on Bethel road or something. Terrible use of space for this parcel, so unimaginative. Especially for a part of the city that has been exploding in popularity recently.

Especially when you compare it to gravity 2.0 which looks like it takes up about the same amount of space. 
 

Edit: after looking at google maps, this site is more narrow than gravity, but it still could be a lot better than two boring basic 6 story buildings. 
 

just build along broad street right now and save the back space for something down the line. 

Edited by VintageLife

6 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Especially when you compare it to gravity 2.0 which looks like it takes up about the same amount of space. 
 

Edit: after looking at google maps, this site is more narrow than gravity, but it still could be a lot better than two boring basic 6 story buildings. 
 

just build along broad street right now and save the back space for something down the line. 

Alright.... who do we email?!?!

42 minutes ago, TIm said:

Alright.... who do we email?!?!

You can always email the Franklinton commission if you want. 

This one technically falls under the Downtown jurisdiction. 

.

Edited by cityscapes
Wrong thread

Even their own report says the overall building structure is fine, it just needs certain elements repaired - which these owners have not only refused to do, but also refused to do even basic weatherproofing or stabilization (for almost 3 years at this point). It's blatant and deliberate neglect in the hopes of furthering cause for demolition

 

Edited by NW24HX

14 minutes ago, NW24HX said:

Even their own report says the overall building structure is fine, it just needs certain elements repaired - which these owners have not only refused to do, but also refused to do even basic weatherproofing or stabilization (for almost 3 years at this point). It's blatant and deliberate neglect in the hopes of furthering cause for demolition

 

 

It was suggested here and elsewhere that the building was basically on the verge of collapse and too far gone to save, so it's hilarious to yet again have it confirmed that this is not a problem with the building, but poor, lazy, cheap developers who simply want to do something quick to fill a space they own. It's infuriating. 

What its the point of even having a Downtown Commission? If they approve this monstrosity, what would they turn down?

3 hours ago, NW24HX said:

Even their own report says the overall building structure is fine, it just needs certain elements repaired - which these owners have not only refused to do, but also refused to do even basic weatherproofing or stabilization (for almost 3 years at this point). It's blatant and deliberate neglect in the hopes of furthering cause for demolition

 

Fines should be issued against the owners for this.

Glenwood is apparently breaking ground. 

1 hour ago, columbus17 said:

Glenwood is apparently breaking ground. 

What project is this? 

33 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

What project is this? 

Mr. Tublancopapi’s 🤦‍♂️

2 hours ago, columbus17 said:

Mr. Tublancopapi’s 🤦‍♂️

 

Uh, are you having a stroke?

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

8 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

 

Uh, are you having a stroke?

TuBlancoPapi is Rob Ellis's social media handle.

I had to Google what that is and uh, no.  I didn't realize Nick Nolte had a Benjamin Button moment, kept the wrinkles, and started a TikTok channel.

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

3 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

I had to Google what that is and uh, no.  I didn't realize Nick Nolte had a Benjamin Button moment, kept the wrinkles, and started a TikTok channel.

The TikTok channel is far better than the terrible things I witnessed on Twitter

^"totally BRB with plans, honest"

Lame. I'm glad to at least see Moody Nolan involved.

2 minutes ago, PizzaScissors said:

Lame. I'm glad to at least see Moody Nolan involved.

I like most of their stuff, but they have put out some not so great things and with the owners of the land who they are, I don’t expect much to come of this. 

23 hours ago, columbus17 said:

Glenwood is apparently breaking ground. 

Where can I read about this?

1 hour ago, tunedupryan said:

Where can I read about this?

Rob posted some video of him building a fence at the site saying they were going to be breaking ground. Is also seeking a 90-day street closure permit for construction. Though the question I think we all have is, where in the world is the crane going???

6 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

Rob posted some video of him building a fence at the site saying they were going to be breaking ground. Is also seeking a 90-day street closure permit for construction. Though the question I think we all have is, where in the world is the crane going???

It wasn’t approved so he can’t build. Unless he just plans on paying massive fines forever. 

34 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

It wasn’t approved so he can’t build. Unless he just plans on paying massive fines forever. 

He has a 7-story "in right" that's going to be a hotel he claims is on-par with Junto. How that's possible 1/2 mile away in that area I don't know.

 

Quick look at the Westrich site on Rich

 

IMG_20241017_162518_6.thumb.jpg.af466593d16628ab4db728946cf1867a.jpg

 

IMG_20241017_162544_2.thumb.jpg.64d8aa22ff3278ec623a1273a0181e51.jpg

 

Another one on the rise!

image.png.5e78647e58eab94a29fee183af043e1a.png

3 hours ago, columbus17 said:

Another one on the rise!

image.png.5e78647e58eab94a29fee183af043e1a.png

No retail 😔

 

Few hours ago at Gravity Greenhouse

 

IMG_20241029_171541_2.thumb.jpg.f30453dcaf491cbe11a91bd332706344.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170424_7.thumb.jpg.3548921e0ec7b1d57a4ffefdc59108f0.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_171218_2.thumb.jpg.cf01191641117859cffa16f39d4d810f.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170532_4.thumb.jpg.1757714a4211318666834b04cfe57bde.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170210_4.thumb.jpg.02a86a8928d7c4d20204f46d04c26d4e.jpg

 

 

State St near Gravity is getting some much needed TLC as well

IMG_20241029_170710_8.thumb.jpg.01c5996936cd50c61b6de12fa2ae0f64.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170733_2.thumb.jpg.7a138b8f91afa716f4ed3d0172da8b4f.jpg

 

 

3 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said:

 

Few hours ago at Gravity Greenhouse

 

IMG_20241029_171541_2.thumb.jpg.f30453dcaf491cbe11a91bd332706344.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170424_7.thumb.jpg.3548921e0ec7b1d57a4ffefdc59108f0.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_171218_2.thumb.jpg.cf01191641117859cffa16f39d4d810f.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170532_4.thumb.jpg.1757714a4211318666834b04cfe57bde.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170210_4.thumb.jpg.02a86a8928d7c4d20204f46d04c26d4e.jpg

 

 

State St near Gravity is getting some much needed TLC as well

IMG_20241029_170710_8.thumb.jpg.01c5996936cd50c61b6de12fa2ae0f64.jpg

 

IMG_20241029_170733_2.thumb.jpg.7a138b8f91afa716f4ed3d0172da8b4f.jpg

 

 

Looks like Taft Brewery closed on the first floor of Gravity.  I never really saw anyone going in there.  

55 minutes ago, sono4315 said:

Looks like Taft Brewery closed on the first floor of Gravity.  I never really saw anyone going in there.  

I know we don’t need more parking in this city, but I do think a lack of street parking along broad plays a part in those businesses success or lack of it. I would guess the constant construction all around it probably didn’t help either. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.