South Campus Gateway

 

Here is their retail tenants and my opinion --

 

1. Cingular: No college campus or development should be without a mobile phone store, for obvious reasons. The release of Apple's iPhone is very appealing to college students and to young professionals.

2. Barnes and Noble: An excellent place for college students to hang out, read, purchase music, and grab a cup of coffee. The Border's at 4th Street Live in Louisville, for instance, is one of their top grossers for their district (C-J).

3. EB Games: Obvious.

4. Finish Line: Obvious. And not expensive, either.

5. Au Moda: Their prices are very reasonable for college students -- and a store from two OSU graduates at that, to provide some checks and balances with reality and surrounding market conditions.

 

6. Caribou Coffee: Obvious, college students love coffee :) Having it in such a prime location is also desirable to parents when they shop around for schools with their sons and daughters. What would you rather see near campus: Seedy bars and tattoo parlors? Or coffee shops and book stores?

7. Cold Stone Creamery: A tad pricey but well worth it. The Pullman Square location in Huntington, which sells to a lot of college students, is one of the top ten stores in the United States.

8. Gateway Drexel Theatre: A great place for independent films. I've been there only once, but long for more venues. The Kentucky is the only comparable one in my locale.

>1. Cingular: No college campus or development should be without a mobile phone store, for obvious reasons. The release of Apple's iPhone is very appealing to college students and to young professionals.

 

There are plenty around already.  Radio Shack just opened a store a half mile north.  No servos or toggle switch department but cell phones galore. 

 

>2. Barnes and Noble: An excellent place for college students to hang out, read, purchase music, and grab a cup of coffee. The Border's at 4th Street Live in Louisville, for instance, is one of their top grossers for their district (C-J).

 

Not sure exactly what transpired but they put a local school bookstore out of business by bringing in Barne's & Noble.  It looks like they took the sign off the old place and put it on the Barnes & Noble.  Reminds me of how the Red Sox were going to physically remove the green monster from Fenway Park when the new Fenway was built in South Boston and it was going to be "just the same".   

 

>3. EB Games: Obvious.

 

Yeah since OSU girls love dudes who smoke pot and play video games. 

 

 

>6. Caribou Coffee: Obvious, college students love coffee  Having it in such a prime location is also desirable to parents when they shop around for schools with their sons and daughters.

 

Kicking and screaming is the only way you're going to get me in the doors of a coffee shop.  But you hit the nail on the head, the gateway sort of exists as a good and proper place for college students to meet their relatives and pretend that there isn't a frenzy of drug use and fornication in the 11th St. dorms. 

 

>What would you rather see near campus: Seedy bars and tattoo parlors?

 

Yes and yeah.

 

>Or coffee shops and book stores?

 

 

No and no. 

 

 

>*sigh* More conspiracy theories and stories.

 

Start working for your campus paper and you'll be privy to all kinds of stuff that doesn't get in the paper.  And start going to bars.  Every night.   

^And start listening to Lou Reed. 

I've said this before but you seem to like only really gritty places and seem to have distain towards people with money or places that you feel cater to people with money. 

Not surprising. I'm sure that the decrease in crime, the revitalization of a declining urban area, the millions upon millions spent by private developers in a _city_, the net gain in tax revenue in a distressed area, etc. is bad.

 

"Yeah since OSU girls love dudes who smoke pot and play video games."

 

And people smoking cigarettes in bars to spite the law is desirable? (We've all seen your photo and rants.)

 

So basically, it comes down to _your_ preferences versus those of others. Who are willing to pay for natural foods and coffee. And who enjoy reading or socializing.

^Im from shaker heights and i love money and all the things it can provide but this kind of architecture and design has nothing to do with "money", it has everything to do with the vibe.  As a student at OSU it is way too "squeaky clean" as was already remarked.  President Holbrook has tried to stomp out everything fun, exciting, and yes sketchy, about campus, as well as off, and I simply feel this type of generic approach to design is lame.  The buildings pictured while very nice as they may be, may as well be from any other city and have no distinct character.  The Ohio State University students demand better!  haha... im working at the US Open outside of pittsburg and im seeing lots og buckeyes out, good to see!

The US Open outside of Pittsburgh??

The Gateway currently has at least 8 empty storefronts, maybe as many as 12 depending on what you count.  Absolutely nothing is not a chain except I guess Eddie George's.

 

 

Pesto isnt a chain either  :-)

and also, I could be wrong, but OSU is continually becoming a better school.  Look at the stats.  Each ncoming class is academically stronger than the next and considering we are the highest ranked public in the state, this institution is becoming very strong academically.  So if you think about that, generally speaking, the 'type' of student coming is changing and probably a bit more affluent(for reasons that go beyond this discussion).  So doesnt this whole development kind of cater to a growing population at OSU? 

>Pesto isnt a chain either

 

It sure looks like one.  Fooled me. 

 

 

>people smoking cigarettes in bars to spite the law is desirable

 

Smoking cigarettes and smoking marijuana have pretty much nothing in common with each other, other than they should be legal everywhere and it should be up to individual property and business owners to decide if they will permit it on their property. 

 

 

>and also, I could be wrong, but OSU is continually becoming a better school.  Look at the stats. 

 

I'm not talking about OSU's academic stats but rather their financial stats surrounding this development.  Just because public universities have to make their records public doesn't mean that those records are accurate.  University administrators and spokesmen always spin whatever the situation is in their favor and considering how many scandals manage to fester simultaneously down at OU being twice as large I'm sure there's plenty going on at OSU.   

 

 

Not surprising. I'm sure that the decrease in crime, the revitalization of a declining urban area, the millions upon millions spent by private developers in a _city_, the net gain in tax revenue in a distressed area, etc. is bad.

 

"Yeah since OSU girls love dudes who smoke pot and play video games."

 

And people smoking cigarettes in bars to spite the law is desirable? (We've all seen your photo and rants.)

 

So basically, it comes down to _your_ preferences versus those of others. Who are willing to pay for natural foods and coffee. And who enjoy reading or socializing.

 

Seicer, using your argument, why not just tear down Over-The-Rhine and build another Crocker Park/Easton? Reduces crime, increases land value, and you get millions of $$$ in developement for Cincy. It gets rid of a 'seedy area' as well. Screw the density, history and functionality of the place....as long as there is a giant health food store, it's OK.

 

In all seriousness, alot of you guys are in your 20's and don't know what was there before. To say that the area is vibrant today is more than a bit of a farce. Vacant store fronts (no matter how pretty you make them) speaks volumes of said 'vibrancy', and there are still plenty of them well after this project has been completed. There were no vacant stores in the area around 1990.

 

Beyond the bars, there were cheap eats on High north of the bar strip, a convience store at the corner of 11th and High and a laundromat (all three of which are 10 times more functional to a student than Caribou Coffee, Potbelly, Cingular or EB Games.)

 

I have feeling this project was put together for the residents of Columbus, not so much so for the students going to OSU. That's fine, but in turn, it actually decreases the urban feel of the area because the large amount of foot traffic provided by the students has been pushed away in favor of people that drive from other parts of the city.

Pock-shots don't vibe well here, and vast misconceptions are not welcome. I never suggested "tearing down Over-the-Rhrine" or even made a general suggestion towards a blanket redevelopment that does not take into account the historical character of the region. Given that, Short North had a mix of historic and non-historic buildings -- many which were in the dumps. Crime was up, land value was down, and it did not present a good image of the district -- especially as it acted as a gateway to OSU. Not all were worth salvaging, and it is always important to realize that not all historical rehabs are practical or cost efficient. Given the amount of time I have spent there, I have noted that many historical structures have not been demolished -- most have been saved, and the buildings that have been demolished were either very neglected, or not in character with the redevelopment plans.

 

Given OTR's case, which I wholly support its redevelopment, there are many buildings that are still worth salvaging and restoring. But what "history and functionality" was in Short North during the 1970s and 1980s? Yes, you still had the businesses and residents who lived on the streets behind it, but it was chock full of tattoo parlors, bars, and crime. Not desireable, especially near a college campus. What has happened is nothing short of a transformation. The history and functionality has remained the same -- with improvements to the facades, buildings, etc. adding new character and vibrancy to the streetscape. Density has increased, with new apartments, condos, and lofts sprouting up like weeds -- and the tenant mix is far more varied. Instead of low-income renters and absentee landlords, you have a higher-income bracket moving back into town who have a vested interest in the redevelopment of their neighborhood. And college students, with their never-ending supply of money, are always very important to cater to -- as they are your next big spenders -- and to have them reside as much as possible in an urbanized area, the better.

 

You state that there were "no vacant stores" in 1990. However, my trips through there over the years, I have counted many empty storefronts. There were also many more undesirable tenants in a gateway corridor, and the lease payments were also considerably lower. Redevelopment projects typically command higher lease rates, which generate higher revenue, but also more voilitality in the commercial-trade market -- not everyone survives and some lose out. That's capitalism at work.

 

There are still laundromats. And there are still cheap eateries. You just have not been looking hard enough or are so damn focused on the new development that is South Campus Gateway that you forget that it even still exists elsewhere. I am typically at OSU to visit friends, and we frequently find cheap (<$10) eateries that are not chains within the district.

 

--

 

And what is wrong with cars? We've all seen what happens when you remove that all important element: projects fail. From the Galleria (now 4th Street Live), to 9th Street Plaza, STL's ped-malls, etc., the removal of cars, even though it had good intentions, was nothing more than a test and a failure for the most part.

 

At least with the Gateway project, the parking structures are concealed from High Street and the development itself.

I think the overall development looks nice, but also think it seems a little sterile.  I am probably being nostalgic from my days at tOSU in the mid-to-late 80's when South Campus was absolutely packed.  The bars would start filling up at 5 PM on the weekends.  On Michigan weekend the sidewalks would be made one way and the police would be out in force with their riot gear and paddy wagons ready.  I think part of what changed for the old South High was the shift in drinking age, but I cannot remember exactly when it went into effect.  In the early 90's I took friends from Cincy there after a football game and had them pumped up about how crazy it was and it was nearly dead.

 

On the plus side I am sure the old derelicts like Don B and Wild Bill are not hanging out in these places.  I do wish they still had places like Mustards, but I am glad to see the area was redeveloped.  Hopefully, they have also exterminated DeSantis from the area as well - he used to be a huge slum lord, and I think he also owned Papa Joe's at one time, which suspiciously burnt down....   

Im working at Mad Mex this summer :] Plans to stay in Cinci got scratched. I think it's a nice development with top notch establishments. Their McFaddens makes downtown Cinci's look like Hardees (okay slight exaggeration). I can't help but compare this to Calhoun steet in Cincinnati, which is more classic looking and brick but hasn't been successful in even attracting tenants, let alone sustaining them.

 

7-11 is such an anomaly. Im sure developers have their eyes on it.

^ Are you familiar with the Clintonville redevelopment efforts? I am curious if they have their development plans or guidelines online, since it seems that the old suburban strips and buildings are being replaced with pedestrian-friendly structures.

From the brief glances I took at this from driving by on High Street it looks like a really nice development.  I will be in Cols for Comfest weekend in about a week or so and  might stop in for a closer look. 

 

 

One point about the old South Campus that never gets mentioned, is the fact that there were more than bars there.  There were two banks, a bike store, a bunch of restaurants, kick ass record stores, something like 4 different pizza places, barber shops, furinture stores (OK, it was Waterbeds and stuff) but that is just off the top of my head.  There was not one empty storefront when I started in '93.  Along with the bars, it was a functional neighborhood unique to Columbus and Ohio State.   

My problem with that place is that the university spent about $100Million to make that place at  a time they raised tuition 50%, because they did not have any money.  Also, to make it qualify for eminent domain, they had to turn the area into a ghost town for the better part of a decade.

And what is the result?  A development that could be anywhere in the country, with nothing unique to Columbus...except for the Longs bookstore sign  :roll:

 

Could have the old South Campus used some polishing, sure.  Just like the Short North needed it in the early 90's.  But now the Short North is a gleaming lively neighborhood, and South Campus is the South Campus Gateway mall.

and also, I could be wrong, but OSU is continually becoming a better school.  Look at the stats.  Each ncoming class is academically stronger than the next and considering we are the highest ranked public in the state, this institution is becoming very strong academically.  So if you think about that, generally speaking, the 'type' of student coming is changing and probably a bit more affluent(for reasons that go beyond this discussion).  So doesnt this whole development kind of cater to a growing population at OSU? 

 

I went to OSU waayyy back in the mid-70's, and although I have no doubt that it has raised academic standards to the point where I probably would not have been admitted today (based on my glowing high school transcript!), I'm also sure their PR machine has been working overtime in an attempt to transform it into another Berkeley or Michigan. Like many universities today OSU desperately wants to be a brand-name school known for something other than football and beer, to reassure middle class yuppie parents that junior is getting his/her money's worth (state universities ain't cheap anymore--and let's not even get into the topic of grade inflation!), so what better way than to make those parents feel even better than to transform campus into a middle class mall--hence, projects like this. But then again if Manhattan can fall prey to the kind of bland, boring gentrification afflicting every other city, why not OSU? Remember when students were supposed to be poor?

^^Well said.  I remember "desirable" stores, and lots of them packed in that block.  Seemed that crime was no worse than any other place that has a lot of drunks stumbling around in the wee hours.

 

"vast misconceptions are not welcome"

 

"chock full of tattoo parlors, bars, and crime."

 

No comment

 

 

I think it would have been just terrible to go to college without dive bars around. Luckily, Portsmouth and Huntington had plenty.

>Remember when students were supposed to be poor?

 

Hey my loan payment's higher than my rent. 

 

 

>I think it would have been just terrible to go to college without dive bars around. Luckily, Portsmouth and Huntington had plenty.

 

I used to do a lot of studying in this Krystal:

 

From "The Four Precinct/Campus Area Statistical Analysis,"

 

10% owner occupancy.

12% of the building stock is less than 25 years old.

 

"The statistics show that there are many residents in this area who are highly transient, non-employed, living below poverty level with little education. There have been numerous studies tying these four factors to being causations of criminal activity. Having all four factors in such a compacted area would put a great deal of pressure on any area. Combining these factors with the off campus student population and their lifestyles causes an even greater pressure toward criminal activity and victimization.

 

Combine these social problems with the antiquated and often unsafe physical structure and design of the area and it becomes clear why criminals are so successful in the area."

 

Nearly half of the assault crime victims were "were impaired with alcohol when assaulted, assaulted inside a bar or party or just outside a bar or party."

 

Many robberies "involved alcohol impaired victims or victims who were in the vicinity of a drug house (40%)."

 

Over 70% of the rape victim "was under the influence of alcohol/drugs and knew suspect."

 

--

 

Oh, here are more "misconceptions" that redevelopment projects reduce crime. From the American Planning Association's "2006 National Planning Award Winners and Planning Pioneers,"

 

"...older home rehabilitation and new house construction, building codes are aggressively enforced and infrastructure improvements are undertaken in order to help stabilize participating neighborhoods. To improve area stability, the program focuses on community leadership, public safety, homeownership, and blight removal. A Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond study of the six revitalized neighborhoods in 2005 found that crime decreased 19 percent compared with 6 percent citywide, and housing prices appreciated nearly 10 percent faster than the city's average." (Richmond, VA)

 

--

 

And who said that Long's was a local bookseller? From "Summary of High Street initiatives,"

 

"Campus Partners acquired the stock of the Long's College Book Company in 2000. Under an agreement with Barnes & Noble College Booksellers, Long's, now located at 15th Avenue and High Street, will be combined with the University Bookstore and moved to the Gateway project. Campus Partners this year will convene stakeholders in the area of 15th and High to begin a planning process to redevelopment the Long's Bookstore site at the heart of the University District."

It was an independent bookstore for over 100 years until Campus Partners bought them out, and leased it out to Barnes and Noble. 

So another one of CP's accompishments is to trade in a local institution with a century of history for a corporate giant in a generic store.  But hey, they saved the clock!

"The family of the late Dr. Frank C. Long, Jr., has sold all of the stock of the Long College Book Company to Campus Partners. The Long's corporation is the owner of the landmark Long's Bookstore business, which has been operated by the Long family at the corner of East 15th Avenue and North High Street for almost 100 years."

 

" When Campus Partners entered into the purchase contract with the Long family, Foegler worked with the university to re-open the discussion with Barnes & Noble College Bookstores to include the Long's Bookstore."

 

At least it wasn't dumped out entirely. Long College Book Company was also, at one point, one of the nation's largest.

 

Didn't Barnes and Noble start somewhere? And Borders? What makes this any different, other than capitalism at work? Don't like it? Don't buy into the program.

I don't frequent Gateway that much. I've been to Drexel once, EB games once, Cold stone twice and I had business to take care in the University offices in one of the buildings there.

The only part I don't care much for is the alley between Ugly tuna, the theater and Skye Bar.

 

I use the stuff on High north of 12th alot more than Gateway.

 

I think it will be interesting to see these new urban projects age. Right now the tenants are Pot Belly, Barnes & Noble and Coldstone, but in twenty years it could be Barnes & Noble, PJ's Barber shop, Missy's sandwiches etc, meaning tenants will change with the neighborhood and the development won't feel as sterile as some think.

You have to have the typical Barnes and Nobles, Paneras, Cold Stones, etc. Those are the companies that can afford space in those new developments. New construction is inherently EXPENSIVE. I think the public space/alley, whatever it is, is nice. There was a band playing last time I was there. Just from looking around at the types of people that go there, It seems like just as many people from Italian Village/short north area enjoy it just as much as students do. I think there's still plenty of hole-in-the-wall places around there, which is essential for broke ass students.

I typed this out in a PM but can't pull up my sent PMs for some reason:

 

Redevelopment projects require a lot of red tape and hassle, for the most part. While rents are lower in the suburbs because of the availability of flat land and land in general, the same cannot be said for urban infill or redevelopment projects. Suburban projects rarely have red tape and discussion regarding parking, design of the buildings, and so on, while urban projects can take years just to get off of the planning board. They require major discussions on parking issues, the design of the buildings (whether they fit into the historic context, density, etc.). The land to purchase is also considerably more expensive and may require cleanup.

 

Take Pullman Square, developed by Columbus' own Metropolitan Partners. Pullman is a lifestyle development in Huntington, West Virginia. For 30 years, the massive tract of land in downtown was undeveloped -- the land was too expensive, needed cleaning, and there was an uncertain market for urban infill projects on that scale. Today, in the Ashland Independent was this article about what Ashland needs to do in order to gain tenants and destinations. For instance, there has been a shift in consumer preferences in what has been referred to as a "spatial relationship" between the retail structure itself and their environment. The latter has a good case study: Easton Town Center, an open-air complex that was very risky to develop but ultimately successful.

 

"A downtown development, also, is only as successful as the city itself. Pullman Square was able to succeed because the city was committed to redeveloping the downtown. Public-private partnerships are also very important. While developers in the past located malls and plazas on flat, available land, today's urban developers require more dependence on the public sector. For instance, Pullman Square would not have been possible without public funding for the parking structures. In return, the developers must be able to demonstrate that the new projects will add to the tax base of the community."

 

"What happens when there is downtown excitement is that people decide it’s the place to be," stated Bill Dargusch. For instance, rather than having a specific destination for dining, a family may simply meet downtown and then make their restaurant and shopping choices.

 

"The presentation by Bill Dargusch was invaluable considering that Metropolitan Partners have had a proven record of success."

 

When you build expensive, new structures from scratch, they will command higher lease payments because of the very high land prices, the costs of doing business with the government, and etc. And you drive away some 'mom-and-pop' businesses in the process, but you also gain some national tenants. And this is from the Lexington DDA -- outsiders tend to view a development as being successful by the amount of national tenants. If they are persuaded as much to stay in a new downtown development project in comparison to a suburban mall, they will certainly spend their money in the downtown. And what is happening, especially with the higher gasoline prices, is that they will typically move into the inner city or near the shopping district.

 

Over the years, the development will mature. Businesses will come and go -- all part of the overall free market system that we have -- but it should not be a 100% indicator on the success of a project. If it increases tax revenues, if it generates more interest in the district, if it causes some surbanites to relocate into the city, and etc., then that's how you should be judging it, not solely on a few empty storefronts.

I think the public space/alley, whatever it is, is nice. There was a band playing last time I was there.

 

Word! It's a very effective focal point for foot traffic, and creates the very unusual sensation (for mainstream Americans, at least) of partying in an alley. It's my favorite part of the development.

Hey okay!

It is right under our noses, everyone here has brought up great ideas, but the real reason the tenants in the gateway exist is being missed by this entire board.

This topic needs answered by me because..

I live right off a street just south of the gateway!

Ok> Everyone here is looking north when trying to find the demographic that the gateway is appealing to,

HOWEVER, your missing the boat

IT is what is south of the gateway that has led for more upscale tenants, and provided the demand for it.

THE SHORT NORTH and DOWNTOWN hello.

I can tell you i live in columbus right next to the gateway and have much time to study what type of people are going there and from where and with what kind of money.

The gateway is functioning to bridge the gap between campus and short north.  The area just south of campus has become so much more rich and upity and trendy in the last 5 years.  Stores that once existed 5 blocks south of campus further down in theshort north are being pushed up closer and closer to campus.

 

A gay book store that was once near the convention center: Now 3 blocks south of the gateway.

 

The short north's portions closer to downtown are becoming more expensive and higher rents, the more bohemian stores, bars, galleries are being pushed closer to campus and the housing that use to be student oriented on very south campus now faces a lot of new immigrants (mexican) and the people who were pushed out of the short north (the poor and bohemian average people) by the gentrification.

 

Buildings that had students in are now being upgraded to grad students, people who work at many gay bars (my friend Luke) in the short north (and the nice restaurants) are being priced out and pushed out by renovations into condos and up up scale apartments.  These conversions are happening in the apartment buildings in the short north and victorian village and italian village.  They are being pushed into the gateway neighorhood.  That is why I live the Gatway area, and most of the people on my street are now mostly post grads working and living there before they buy a cond loft.

 

ALso, The short north has mostly highend stores on high st. All of the new downtown area residents and grandview heigts people need more retail. The Gateway is trying to fufill the need for a store like Sunflower market, make no mistake sunflower is not there solely for the students (hel* no) they are there for all the new affluent young, hipsters, and yuppies, and retired people that now surround downtown andhave spread out to Grandview.  That is why the gateway exisits; I know people who drive in from suburbs to go out there.

 

The other night i was eating at Eddie Georges. A Columbus Crew soccer play was on a date there and he lives in the Brewery District near German VIllage.  Columbus has money in downtown area now and those people have places to go but always need more. 

 

It just so happens that the gateway is providing these retail needs to the well off but also still picking a mix of retail that will appeal to the students with some money or a lot, and the need for more upscale retail by the new people living SOUTH of the gateway, not NORTH.

 

 

The concept of the campus area functioning as a little college town unto itself is way outdated..

If you can look into the hourglass this what you will see in the campus area in columbus in the future: more gateway type developement as urban Columbus gentrifcation and office development consumes inward to mix in with parts of campus.  The city knows there is room for office (the Gateway has office space and is now gaining a small convention space for businesses) and retail growth in the OSU campus corridor and they are going to make use of it. 

^^ Yeah, but your argument is the problem with the place. If the idea of South Campus Gateway is to gentrify the surrounding neighborhood, it starts to limit the amount of available housing for college students that were undergrad and pay their rent by doing things like delivering pizzas or working at some fast-food joint. Where do they go? Bethel Rd.? It's not like Columbus has great transportation options and Ohio State has enough parking spots to cater people that would be, quite honestly, forced to drive in that situation. Not every neighborhood should be catered to an upscale gay population, eateries for local sports athletes or creating an extension of one's d'town. There has to be some common sense in the matter. There was no common sense in creating this. The logic was: get the homeless people/poor people out and if we lose some college students that could afford to live in the area along the way so be it. In the process they've lost a fair amount of foot-traffic compared to times past, and turned High St. on its end.

There's so much housing stock in that area though. It shouldn't be too bad as long as they increase the density with new projects and not just increase the demand. I for one am very appreciative of cheap housing near our universities; a girl I know in Evanston, IL is paying 1600 a month for a 2bdrm apt. with her friend  :-o

People complain about how high the rents are in the district, but the prices I was quoted for South Campus Gateway and others are _cheap_ compared to what my friends are paying at NYU, PIAD, and even here at UK. That is affordable, but when people are accustomed to poor housing stock (per reports I cited earlier) that rent for cheap by absentee landlords or landlords who couldn't give a damn about the property, then anything over what that price is is suddenly "outrageous."

Not to mention, Gateway and the nearby short north do a good job of convincing students to come to OSU in the first place (they're obviously going to be more impressed by new development than dirty cheap housing). In this case, I'm pro-development because I can't see it bleeding much further into campus (professionals aren't gonna want to live that closely to the college scene and students alone can't sustain two-level McFaddens and Hyde Park Steakhouses).

 

I never saw high street as being "rich", just vibrant because of high density of singles and young professionals in general but I noticed a Segway store the other day and nothing says disposable income like buying one of those things.

^ Thank you David. That corresponds to my critical comment on the aesthetics of the Gateway project, and the revitalization of the districts around the university as a whole. Parent's are not going to send their children to a school that is surrounded by seedy tattoo parlors, bars, or head shops (as appealing as it may be to the select few on here). They are also not going to send their children to schools in high-crime areas (as cited earlier), or have them live in off-campus substandard housing (as cited earlier). Much needed investment is needed in the districts around the university, and this is just the start. The apartments and lofts are still very much affordable to rent (try pricing them at other universities in similar revitalizing areas); $600-$1000 for 1 br. is not out of the question anymore. I am paying $680 for an _efficency_ in a downtown location, but save money on biking to work, to the grocery store, etc. It comes out about even.

 

I also have a friend who is going to Univ. of Houston, and is living 2 miles from campus in a shady area. $800/month for rent in a tiny 1 br. Anything closer is cheaper, but the neighborhoods surrounding the university are extremely run-down, infested with crime, and are not oriented to college students (think Short North, etc. 15 years ago).

>a girl I know in Evanston, IL is paying 1600 a month for a 2bdrm apt. with her friend 

 

She's paying it or her parents are paying it?  Granted girls get bartending jobs a lot easier than dudes, but you didn't elaborate.

 

 

>quoted for South Campus Gateway and others are _cheap_ compared to what my friends are paying at NYU, PIAD, and even here at UK

 

In college, I paid $125/mo and $220/mo in Cincinnati and even $77/mo in Tennessee.  Right now I pay $330/mo.  Why do I live in cheap places?  Because my parents didn't and don't pay for stuff.  And yes I am trying to make all of you whose parents pay for everything feel guilty.  When you don't have the money, you don't have the dining "options", the shopping "options", etc.   

 

Wrong. I pay for my own rent because I have a nice paying job at the university -- found on my own, thank you very much. Your generalizations that anyone with money must be mooching off of their parents is unfounded and wholly speculative. Not everyone works as a bartender to "make good money" -- there are many other jobs that pay just as well and are not in a restaurant or bar envrion. A good education is all that is needed, and anyone can find an internship or co-op... or shock, a regular job.

 

When you have the money, you can spend it freely as you see fit. If they can afford to live in an apartment at the Gateway, etc., then why complain? I can see a pattern setting up here... anyone who can afford to live in such a "gentrified" development must have rich parents.

 

For $330/month here, I can rent out of a total slum party house near campus. But I choose to live in a more upscale envion, in a downtown high rise, where security is pretty much a given, and where I don't have to worry about partying neighbors, crime, etc. I pay -- with my own money, with my own job -- for the sake of being in a nice place.

 

(And BTW, market rate increase pretty much pushes out any $125/month rentals, unless it was in a total slum. $125/month here gets you a shack, literally, in north Lexington, where the crime rate is much higher. How long ago was this?)

IMO parents should pay for as much of their kids college as they can, as long as their child is working a part time job, i.e. "being responsible". I wouldn't pay to have my kid live in a new development unless he was splitting that one bedroom with another room mate, cutting the cost in half, which I think is what a lot of people do. Im paying roughly 250 a month next year for my portion of a house near UC and I'm perfectly happy with it.

 

I'm a cheap ass like you JMecklenborg but there's still always going to be the upper middle class suburban parents that are willing to pay ridiculous rents for their kids to live in new expensive development so I don't see development creeping up High Street as a bad thing. Now, me personally, if my parents gave me 700 a month to live with someone in stetson square, I'd pocket the excess money, and live somewhere cheaper since they never come down to visit me anyway.

>quoted for South Campus Gateway and others are _cheap_ compared to what my friends are paying at NYU, PIAD, and even here at UK

 

In college, I paid $125/mo and $220/mo in Cincinnati and even $77/mo in Tennessee.  Right now I pay $330/mo.  Why do I live in cheap places?  Because my parents didn't and don't pay for stuff.  And yes I am trying to make all of you whose parents pay for everything feel guilty.  When you don't have the money, you don't have the dining "options", the shopping "options", etc.   

 

 

Why should someone feel guilty for having money, or from coming from money? If someone's parents want to shell out money so their kid can live in a nicer environment, that's their choice.  I don't know why you're so bitter all the time about people having more money than you.

>Your generalizations that anyone with money must be mooching off of their parents is unfounded and wholly speculative. Not everyone works as a bartender to "make good money" -- there are many other jobs that pay just as well and are not in a restaurant or bar envrion.

 

I am talking about people in college, not people out of college with full-time jobs.  Except drug dealing and stripping what job that a person in college can get exceeds what can be made as a bartender?  Due to employee theft there's really nothing that tops bartending or being doorman.  There are a lot of bartenders out there making $50K only working two or three nights a week.   

 

 

>Your generalizations that anyone with money must be mooching off of their parents is unfounded and wholly speculative.

 

In college and in grad school I knew a lot of people who had never, ever, ever had a job of any kind.  I knew a guy who got $2,000 a month from his parents and then would complain about being low on money.  These people are out there and there are a lot of them. 

 

>If someone's parents want to shell out money so their kid can live in a nicer environment, that's their choice.

 

Can't remember the title of the song but there's a Bob Dylan lyric "helpless like a rich man's son". 

 

 

 

 

 

There's almost no one going to college that isn't being supported by their parents. Anyone who says they're going to college with out the help of their parents is full of sh!t. The system is set up to where parents are expected to help. A part time job is all a student can handle, and in most cases, it would barely cover a car payment and insurance, let alone rent, cell phone, textbooks, food etc.

There's almost no one going to college that isn't being supported by their parents. Anyone who says they're going to college with out the help of their parents is full of sh!t. The system is set up to where parents are expected to help. A part time job is all a student can handle, and in most cases, it would barely cover a car payment and insurance, let alone rent, cell phone, textbooks, food etc.

 

you mean almost no one you know.

 

personally speaking, i was a traditional undergrad college student in every sense (lccc, csu, bgsu) except that i 100% paid my own way via work/loans/grants and unlike the students you are referring to i even had to send money home to my parents on occasion -- although that last part is unusual, this sounds like something that would be totally outside your awareness.

 

but more commonly lots of students do work/study and or take loans and get grants w/o parental help. also, depends what you mean by college too. if not traditional 4yr schools, i'd bet a good portion of community college students pay their way. ditto the urban schools and tech/business schools like say devry.

I am talking about people in college, not people out of college with full-time jobs.  Except drug dealing and stripping what job that a person in college can get exceeds what can be made as a bartender?  Due to employee theft there's really nothing that tops bartending or being doorman.  There are a lot of bartenders out there making $50K only working two or three nights a week. 

 

In college and in grad school I knew a lot of people who had never, ever, ever had a job of any kind.  I knew a guy who got $2,000 a month from his parents and then would complain about being low on money.  These people are out there and there are a lot of them.

 

No, I was referring to people in college. I make plenty of money that I can afford a decent apartment, and I am saving for a downpayment on a new condo. I have friends who are making money working at Best Buy, being a waiter, doing internships and co-ops, and so on. There are plenty of jobs, if you want to do some legwork yourself, they are there.

 

^ Community college and technical schools are FAR cheaper than typical four-year universities. Not your typical Phoenix University, whose degrees are so watered down that many companies simply do not accept them. Want a good education from a quality school? You need to pay up. Loans are okay for some, but you are going to have an assload of payments after and it can come back to haunt you. Grants are harder to get anymore. Scholarships are for those who are smart and/or talented.

 

As for what David said, 75% of students are supported by their parents ("Univ. of Kentucky Registar Statistics"). That is a majority.

^and cc's and tech schools, etc. added up are 75% of all college students. but if you want to narrow the field seicer , fine.

 

question: your uk info doesnt say what support means. $50 a month? $2k?

 

regardless, even tho most students at traditional 4yr schools do get money from home, david also said "almost no one" goes it alone and 25% at uk is certainly not even close to almost no one.

 

i still say there were a lot of students going the loan/grant/work route at bgsu. that would at least imply the majority of the burden is on them. yet maybe you count those as being supported by parents too? i dk its muddy at that level.

 

and don't get me started if you think the instruction you get undergrad at a 4yr state school in ohio is better than what you can get at a community college. not always true either.

 

 

It depends on the rankings and the college you are in. I'm using my own personal bias towards UK and the program I am in, which is #5 ranked (Decision Science), but there are many programs here at UK that are highly ranked -- and many that simply do not exist at the level at a community college or technical/vo-tech field (due to the complexities of the program, and that a community college typically do not offer 4 year degrees -- at least here in Kentucky).

 

By parental support from my 75% statistic, that is open-ended. It was a generalized question that was offered on a simple polling sheet given to the students to fill out -- it was optional. Even if it was $50 a month or $3,000 a month, that is still support. Then you must include in other forms of support, which are too numerous to describe.

 

As for the loan deal, is it the parents paying off the loan while the child is in school? Or the child after he graduates? It's a murky area.

>quoted for South Campus Gateway and others are _cheap_ compared to what my friends are paying at NYU, PIAD, and even here at UK

 

In college, I paid $125/mo and $220/mo in Cincinnati and even $77/mo in Tennessee.  Right now I pay $330/mo.  Why do I live in cheap places?  Because my parents didn't and don't pay for stuff.  And yes I am trying to make all of you whose parents pay for everything feel guilty.  When you don't have the money, you don't have the dining "options", the shopping "options", etc.   

 

 

Why should someone feel guilty for having money, or from coming from money? If someone's parents want to shell out money so their kid can live in a nicer environment, that's their choice.  I don't know why you're so bitter all the time about people having more money than you.

 

If I may interject: It's not that anyone should be bitter about people having more money than others, be it a little or a lot. If parents want to pamper their children while in college that's fine, and that's pretty much expected if you're fortunate enough to attend an elite private school.  It's just that these days even state universities are becoming increasingly unaffordable to prospective students from the poor and working class; not that this is the fault of the affluent, but in an effort to make them more selective, these schools are now catering to those with more bucks, creating an even greater class gap than ever.

100% here, got the student loans to prove it

^ Have fun paying it :( I know a friend who went that route and has to pay it off over the next 30 years.

 

^^ Not necessairly that reason alone. The costs of retaining skilled and highly educated professors has risen sharply, along with the costs of just about everything there is at a university. Here at UK, we have a state mandate to become a Top 20 university by 2020 -- meaning that we have had sharp increases in the budget to retain highly qualified faculty. Along with that, many of our buildings are horribly outdated and old and need to be either replaced or renovated. There are also an uber amount of building projects ongoing, including one of the largest academic buildings in the nation. That costs a lot of $$$.

 

But in a way, increasing tuition by over 50% since I started does make it more selective. Those at the bottom can only afford to take out loans or hope for a scholarship. Or work their way through, but given that tuition does not match the market rate (unlike rent), then it is a lose-lose situation.

David,

You said that to you you haven’t' viewed high st. as being up scale (other than German village area) that is maybe true in the past, but not these days.

 

The part of the short north that was developed first is very upscale now.

Lets just discuss a few of the retail and housing options on High St. between Goodale (the gap) and 3rd.

Rosendale’s- a new restaurant opened by a chef from the Greenbrier resort. Average entree here is 35 plus.

Dakota Condo Building- Most units are over 500,000 and up.

Sole Classics Store- Here a hoddie will run you almost 300 dollars

Rigby’s- Average price point for your main course is 25-38

Dr. Mojoe- If you find a pair of jeans in Mojoe for below 200 that's a bargain

Hyde Park Steakhouse- I don’t need to say anything more about this one

 

Now what makes the short north so cool still is that the high end has still been mixed with somewhat bohemian and hole in the wall bars/pubs like Short North tavern, and the random art galleries (not that they are cheap either, try paying a few thousand for a tea pot)

And yes the Short North does have Ohio's first Segway outlet right on High St. next to Sole Classics and Planet Smoothie

 

Also, all of the new condo developments in the Short North are getting more upscale as they continue. Most of them are being developed by the owners of the gay bars Union and Axis who know own half of the Short North and have aligned themselves with the democratic party, and the new governor, Senator, etc. etc.

*This is another tangent, but kind of on topic, because the growth in the short north and gay business men who have gotten wealthy off of the growth are now using their money to pay their way into politics at the statehouse

 

I know from personal experience.

 

Saturday night I dined with the owner of the Dakota building who sat with the governor, his wife, and the mayor championing the cause of Gay Rights at a fundraiser for the Human Rights Campaign (which actually included the HRC from Dayton, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis; as they do not have their own fundraiser and enough corporate sponsorship of gay rights as Columbus, Cincinnati did have an exec from 5/3 representing, while Columbus had Nationwide, Chase, Limited, and Abercrombie and Fitch)

 

And last week a lead short north developer met with Sherrod Brown at Union Station, the new upscale million-dollar Union gay bar in the Short North

 

Do realize, the short north is serving a greater purpose in the new democratic Ohio

Columbus has a lot of "new" money from all of this development, and most is gay, and most is now championing their cause and making a impact on the state law as a whole, its a beautiful thing, but without the money in the Short North this wouldn't be happening (Example: Cite the Governors new order to protect sexual orientation and gender identity for any workplace employee which was just enacted by him a little more than a month ago)

Even further explanation for the Short North’s more upscale success is the homes that align the side streets are more expensive, more Victorian Village rental units or apartment buildings are converted to Condos and running close to a million in some cases, for town homes (very nice ones though)

 

German Village was once much less upscale, now it is very expensive

The same thing is happening to Victorian Village and now the Short North and right under some people’s noses

 

Of course, this is all just further proof to how wealthy the short north is getting, a new condo tower is being built in the northern section of the short north with a roof top pool and units start above 300,000, and this is next to Skully's dinner where bums hang out now and just blocks from the Gateway, make no mistake, condo developments will push as close to campus as they can, High St. is in for much greater change than many here know or can understand.

 

David,

You said that to you you haven’t' viewed high st. as being up scale (other than German village area) that is maybe true in the past, but not these days.

 

I was implying that I didn't view it as upscale PREVIOUSLY. Believe me, I almost wreck every time I drive through there because I pay too much attention to the business inventory, street life, etc.

I like German Village but its extremely limited in what it has to offer.

 

The Short North serves as a great central location for the city and I think that whats happening and what will be happening is totally inevitable and I have no problem with it going north because I really don't beleive it will go any farther than the edge of OSU. I wasn't suggesting wealth isn't coming into the area, I was asserting that also density of wealth is also helping the area.

 

As for what David said, 75% of students are supported by their parents ("Univ. of Kentucky Registar Statistics"). That is a majority.

 

The people who worked their way through UofK when I was there was few.  That included even more blue collar people (UK wasnt so expensive back then).  That was the case with me, but I also had some help from my grandparents and a student loan, which took me a few years to pay off.

 

but there are many programs here at UK that are highly ranked -- and many that simply do not exist at the level at a community college or technical/vo-tech field (due to the complexities of the program, and that a community college typically do not offer 4 year degrees

 

That even held for 4 year state unis in KY, as UofK had programs that they did not. If one wanted to major in certain fields one had to go to UK.

 

t's just that these days even state universities are becoming increasingly unaffordable to prospective students from the poor and working class; not that this is the fault of the affluent, but in an effort to make them more selective, these schools are now catering to those with more bucks, creating an even greater class gap than ever.

 

That was already the case for UofK back in the 1970s when I was there. It was noticeable that a lot of the students had parents in management or the professions or buisness and had college degrees.  There was certainly a culture shock for me, to have most of my classmates from the bourgouis. 

 

Most of the people I went to high school with, if they went to college, went to UofL or someplace like Western, where they could live with their folks or with kin and commute in from the farm, saving on room and board. I'd say less than five from my high school graduating class went to UofK.  That would have been the case with me, too, if I hadn't majored in architecture.