April 6, 20187 yr I was in attendance the other evening of a dress rehearsal for Hair! at the Garden Theater in the Short North put on by Short North Stage. My friends bought this theater years ago and have been slowly with much effort transforming it bit by bit. I've always enjoyed going to their shows as an alternative to the larger scale of CAPA (I love CAPA and am a season ticket holder, not insulting them here). Anyways, I was speaking with them on the updates and things to come, and I was informed that they have raised enough funding to bring back the marquee for the front of the building. They are in the final process of having it approved by the Victorian Village Commission of course as they will modernize it with LED lighting. This also needs to be approved by the state as High Street is technically a state route (SR23). Anyways, the momentum heading up to the north end of the Short North is happening and it will be exciting to see this section of the district fill out and flourish in the coming years!! Here's a few pics for context..... Good news! Confused though. Does the marquee not light up like in the last photo right now? They're just getting new lights installed? Also, 23 is a US Route, not state. And it veers from High St at Livingston and is Fourth/Third up to Hudson. And then Indianola from Hudson to Morse. Then back to High. So this section of High shouldn't be subject to state approvals. So the neon sign was restored at the very beginning, the marquee to be able to display/list their shows and events is what is being restored now. It will go below the green neon sign you see now. As for the US Route, based on my conversation with them, they said they still had to go to the state for it. Mainly to agree not to do "flashy advertisements" and "video" type displays on the LED board that will be part of it. Again, just going off of what they said to me.......excited to see this happen though!! They are nervous about the Phase 3 of the High Street streetscape reconstruction taking away patrons during their next season, however I feel true theater enthusiasts will still attend. They gave a preview of the season to come and it looks to be a pretty good one!! Mama Mia, Rocky Horror, Pippin, etc......
April 6, 20187 yr I was in attendance the other evening of a dress rehearsal for Hair! at the Garden Theater in the Short North put on by Short North Stage. My friends bought this theater years ago and have been slowly with much effort transforming it bit by bit. I've always enjoyed going to their shows as an alternative to the larger scale of CAPA (I love CAPA and am a season ticket holder, not insulting them here). Anyways, I was speaking with them on the updates and things to come, and I was informed that they have raised enough funding to bring back the marquee for the front of the building. They are in the final process of having it approved by the Victorian Village Commission of course as they will modernize it with LED lighting. This also needs to be approved by the state as High Street is technically a state route (SR23). Anyways, the momentum heading up to the north end of the Short North is happening and it will be exciting to see this section of the district fill out and flourish in the coming years!! Here's a few pics for context..... Good news! Confused though. Does the marquee not light up like in the last photo right now? They're just getting new lights installed? Also, 23 is a US Route, not state. And it veers from High St at Livingston and is Fourth/Third up to Hudson. And then Indianola from Hudson to Morse. Then back to High. So this section of High shouldn't be subject to state approvals. So the neon sign was restored at the very beginning, the marquee to be able to display/list their shows and events is what is being restored now. It will go below the green neon sign you see now. As for the US Route, based on my conversation with them, they said they still had to go to the state for it. Mainly to agree not to do "flashy advertisements" and "video" type displays on the LED board that will be part of it. Again, just going off of what they said to me.......excited to see this happen though!! They are nervous about the Phase 3 of the High Street streetscape reconstruction taking away patrons during their next season, however I feel true theater enthusiasts will still attend. They gave a preview of the season to come and it looks to be a pretty good one!! Mama Mia, Rocky Horror, Pippin, etc...... Awesome! I see now what they're doing. I went to a show there a few years ago in September and it was incredibly hot in there. You could also hear a nearby chopper in the sky. Have little things like that been remedied since? Glad we have the theater in good hands.
April 6, 20187 yr I was in attendance the other evening of a dress rehearsal for Hair! at the Garden Theater in the Short North put on by Short North Stage. My friends bought this theater years ago and have been slowly with much effort transforming it bit by bit. I've always enjoyed going to their shows as an alternative to the larger scale of CAPA (I love CAPA and am a season ticket holder, not insulting them here). Anyways, I was speaking with them on the updates and things to come, and I was informed that they have raised enough funding to bring back the marquee for the front of the building. They are in the final process of having it approved by the Victorian Village Commission of course as they will modernize it with LED lighting. This also needs to be approved by the state as High Street is technically a state route (SR23). Anyways, the momentum heading up to the north end of the Short North is happening and it will be exciting to see this section of the district fill out and flourish in the coming years!! Here's a few pics for context..... Good news! Confused though. Does the marquee not light up like in the last photo right now? They're just getting new lights installed? Also, 23 is a US Route, not state. And it veers from High St at Livingston and is Fourth/Third up to Hudson. And then Indianola from Hudson to Morse. Then back to High. So this section of High shouldn't be subject to state approvals. So the neon sign was restored at the very beginning, the marquee to be able to display/list their shows and events is what is being restored now. It will go below the green neon sign you see now. As for the US Route, based on my conversation with them, they said they still had to go to the state for it. Mainly to agree not to do "flashy advertisements" and "video" type displays on the LED board that will be part of it. Again, just going off of what they said to me.......excited to see this happen though!! They are nervous about the Phase 3 of the High Street streetscape reconstruction taking away patrons during their next season, however I feel true theater enthusiasts will still attend. They gave a preview of the season to come and it looks to be a pretty good one!! Mama Mia, Rocky Horror, Pippin, etc...... Awesome! I see now what they're doing. I went to a show there a few years ago in September and it was incredibly hot in there. You could also hear a nearby chopper in the sky. Have little things like that been remedied since? Glad we have the theater in good hands. So it is definitely a work in progress. Each year more and more improvements happen. I will say that when they bought it, it was being considered for demolition as water was actually coming through the ceiling. This is why the main theater is so exposed and raw right now. I actually like the raw look though, something organic and revealing about it. Their first remedy was to get the roof in shape ASAP to stop any further damage, but with this there isn't really much of a "buffer" in the way of a ceiling which is why you may hear a chopper from time to time. They have put in AC however I'm not sure how strong it is, I'm sure they are trying to put this on the "to do" list. It's definitely a labor of love in my opinion as these guys are incredible theater enthusiasts and this is genuinely a great asset for this arts district IMO, but progress for how expensive things like this can be is a slower pace.....
April 9, 20187 yr I visited Columbus this past weekend for the first time in two years. Drove on High from Lane to the statehouse. Ho-Lay. I hardly recognized anything!
April 9, 20187 yr Columbus shows that large and sustained growth like that is possible in mid-sized Midwestern metros. There isn't some magical and all-powerful force keeping investment from entering the Midwest. It IS possible. It can happen elsewhere in the region if people want it enough and are willing to make the institutional and social changes necessary to make way for it.
April 9, 20187 yr ^ Ah, so THAT's the key to economic growth! People just have to want it really, really badly, cross their fingers, wear their pajamas inside out, and chant "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can." Damn, if only someone would have told every midwest city not named Columbus or Chicago this secret! Seriously though, what are the institutional and social changes you speak of?
April 9, 20187 yr ^ Ah, so THAT's the key to economic growth! People just have to want it really, really badly, cross their fingers, wear their pajamas inside out, and chant "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can." Damn, if only someone would have told every midwest city not named Columbus or Chicago this secret! Seriously though, what are the institutional and social changes you speak of? The first step is to not mock people who suggest that change and growth are possible. Next, set aside resentment of others' success and learn from them instead. Third, don't nostalgically reflect on your city's past greatness and see politics as score-settling among groups competing to show that YOU are a true local (this consumes politics in Cincinnati) and that others are disloyal and threaten an imagined social unity. Beyond these obvious suggestions, RANA FOROOHAR describes what's working in Columbus in an article published in the Financial Times last week. Her main point is that in Columbus, "The Democratic mayor went to the Republican city fathers and persuaded them to support a tax rise, the first in nearly four decades. They agreed, on condition that a chunk of that money would go into a public-private economic development partnership that focused on how to cultivate human capital for an era in which all value will reside in intellectual property, data and ideas." It's clearly working. https://www.ft.com/content/3205ef22-334e-11e8-b5bf-23cb17fd1498
April 9, 20187 yr So when Democrats and Republicans work together instead bickering and calling each other Snowflakes and Drumpf Supporters, positive things can actually be accomplished?
April 9, 20187 yr ^ Ah, so THAT's the key to economic growth! People just have to want it really, really badly, cross their fingers, wear their pajamas inside out, and chant "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can." Damn, if only someone would have told every midwest city not named Columbus or Chicago this secret! Seriously though, what are the institutional and social changes you speak of? The fact is that the Midwest has many growing cities, so Columbus is hardly alone there. In fact, here are all the Midwest cities with populations of 100K or more that have seen growth since 2010. Chicago (though it has lost population in recent years, it's still technically ahead of 2010). Columbus Indianapolis Milwaukee Kansas City, MO Omaha Minneapolis Wichita Saint Paul Cincinnati Lincoln Fort Wayne Madison Des Moines Aurora Grand Rapids Overland Park Springfield, MO Kansas City, KS Joliet Naperville Olathe Warren Cedar Rapids That City Up North Fargo Columbia, MO Evansville Independence, MO Lansing Rochester, MN Elgin Green Bay Davenport South Bend Clinton, MI While Columbus is growing fastest, we need to move past the idea that the Midwest doesn't have growth in many areas. The large Midwestern cities that are NOT growing are the exceptions, not the rule. So instead of asking what Columbus is doing right, maybe the question should be directed at the cities losing population as to what they're doing wrong. Some of these cities are old and with small boundaries. Most are not state capitals or have flagship universities. So there are clear differences from Columbus, and yet they still grow.
April 9, 20187 yr So when Democrats and Republicans work together instead bickering and calling each other Snowflakes and Drumpf Supporters, positive things can actually be accomplished? Eh, I think that depends. On the local level, where political differences aren't quite so exaggerated, this is much easier to do. On the national stage, I'm not sure if it'll ever be possible again, at least not without vastly different leadership in place on both sides that is willing work for the national good. That seems like mere fantasy. For Columbus, this collaboration works because there is a recognition that if Columbus is doing well as the core city, the suburbs are going to do well too. In other cities, the suburbs and the core city can have a them vs. us, contemptuous relationship, and that ends up hurting everyone the same that it does at the national level.
April 9, 20187 yr Columbus isn't just growing faster, it's growing differently..with an economic diversity and rising level of skills that other midwestern metros, except Chicago and Indy, aren't creating.
April 9, 20187 yr Columbus isn't just growing faster, it's growing differently..with an economic diversity and rising level of skills that other midwestern metros, except Chicago and Indy, aren't creating. I've always thought that Columbus' best economic characteristic was not its status as a capital or having OSU or even a diversified economy, but rather leadership's ability to sell and expand upon its limited assets to maximum effect. It doesn't have the legacy cultural amenities, or the grand-scale development. It doesn't have the name recognition. It doesn't have the global pull. It doesn't have a lot of things. And instead of trying to become every other city, it simply quietly works to make its own fundamentals of economic and social life run as smoothly as possible. Livability isn't flashy, but it is attractive to a lot of people.
April 9, 20187 yr Columbus isn't just growing faster, it's growing differently..with an economic diversity and rising level of skills that other midwestern metros, except Chicago and Indy, aren't creating. I've always thought that Columbus' best economic characteristic was not its status as a capital or having OSU or even a diversified economy, but rather that leadership's ability to sell and expand upon its limited assets to maximum effect. It doesn't have the legacy cultural amenities, or the grand-scale development. It doesn't have the name recognition. It doesn't have the global pull. It doesn't have a lot of things. And instead of trying to become every other city, it simply quietly works to make its own fundamentals of economic and social life run as smoothly as possible. Livability isn't flashy, but it is attractive to a lot of people. I'd argue that OSU increasingly DOES have "global pull" for academics, administrators, and ambitious students. I wouldn't say that Columbus is particularly "quiet" either. Columbus' leadership is much better at PR than other mid-sized midwest metros. I'm sure RANA FOROOHAR got a lot of help from people in Columbus in writing her article. If she'd asked leaders in Cincinnati the same thing, she'd have gotten a "who wants to know" response.
April 10, 20187 yr Re: Columbus having "limited assets"...yeah it has fewer prewar areas than Cincinnati or Cleveland but it does have a lot more walkable stuff than does...Dallas or Houston or Atlanta or Nashville or Knoxville or Charlotte. It's not tough to picture lowly Parsons Ave. reborn as a fairly desirable address by 2030. The silver lining to Cleveland and Cincinnati having so many so-so prewar neighborhoods is that they do provide cheap housing for people who are willing to put up with some crap. By 2030 Columbus could experience a complete yuppie takeover and a Nashville-like housing crisis.
April 10, 20187 yr ^Going along with both this and what jonoh81 said upthread, Columbus has easily the most open-arms policy of any Ohio city with respect to welcoming newbies. I think it's much easier to get scared away by the insane political/cultural crap that happens in Cleveland and particularly in Cincinnati (as outlined in a recent Aaron Renn post about a guy who briefly moved to somewhere in Ohio from the Pacific Northwest but couldn't handle the hostility) than it is in Columbus, where you don't have a John Cranley running around blocking developments or a Jimmy Dimora using taxpayer money to buy hookers. I'm still not sure that Columbus has enough "branding capital" to become a Nashville or an Austin (unless some flagship SXSW-type event pops up that gets nationally popular), but I can very easily see Columbus becoming a northern Charlotte; a sort of "second city" to Chicago the way Charlotte is to Atlanta. Not as many skyscrapers, not quite as culturally interesting, but a strong city in its own right that's very liveable. Which by many measures and in my humble opinion, it already is. “To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”
April 10, 20187 yr Even if statistics indicate otherwise, I don't think that Columbus will "feel" bigger than Cincinnati and Cleveland until it gets MUCH bigger. I do think that within the past five years High St. emerged as the undisputed greatest city street in the state, after having suffered through a few decades of mild neglect. But I question how much more can happen there without destroying each remaining small building. I would hope that the city enacts relatively draconian protections sooner rather than later. Limiting tear-downs and new construction between Downtown and OSU will motivate growth on Cleveland, Main, Parsons, South High, Franklinton, etc.
April 10, 20187 yr Trolley service ready to roll in the Short North Soon there will be a new way to get around the Short North. Short North Trolley expects to launch May 4. It’s a new venture from a trio of Ohio State University college friends – Tom OBrien, Jon Lorenz and Jeff Shugarts – that aims to be an option for those who might want a guided visit to the neighborhood and those looking for a secure, fun night out. Just don’t expect to hail a trolley bus and hop on. “We recognize Columbus is expanding and there’s a need for additional transportation options,” Lorenz said. “The Short North is super dense. There’s more residential coming. It’s the best place for us to start and end.” More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2018/04/09/trolleyservice-ready-to-roll-in-the-short-north.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
April 10, 20187 yr So...uhh...back to the Short North. According to the map in this PDF of the Short North Design Guidelines Hubbard Park Place is also in the Short North. Looks to me they just include everything in between the single family areas of Victorian and Italian villages. https://www.columbus.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=80919
April 10, 20187 yr Even if statistics indicate otherwise, I don't think that Columbus will "feel" bigger than Cincinnati and Cleveland until it gets MUCH bigger. I do think that within the past five years High St. emerged as the undisputed greatest city street in the state, after having suffered through a few decades of mild neglect. But I question how much more can happen there without destroying each remaining small building. I would hope that the city enacts relatively draconian protections sooner rather than later. Limiting tear-downs and new construction between Downtown and OSU will motivate growth on Cleveland, Main, Parsons, South High, Franklinton, etc. The secret to growth in boomtowns is that they just let it happen. They don't seek to manage development patterns by influencing individual development projects. Boomtowns just ride the wave, they don't presume that growth is 'theirs' to direct. Short North is a long way from the growth of Dallas, Nashville, Austin, Denver, or Charlotte, but it's the closest we have to it in the region. Short North grew because Columbus government let it. It didn't insist that only local developers build projects of a certain form in pre-approved locations owned by select local families using public money and eminent domain to 'direct' what goes where. In Cincinnati, this has resulted in many abandoned projects as the anointed dominate development by gaming a complex set of rules and procedures. Far fewer projects are abandoned in Columbus. They just let them happen. Columbus' economic development strategy is focused on people, instead of buildings.
April 10, 20187 yr Even if statistics indicate otherwise, I don't think that Columbus will "feel" bigger than Cincinnati and Cleveland until it gets MUCH bigger. I do think that within the past five years High St. emerged as the undisputed greatest city street in the state, after having suffered through a few decades of mild neglect. But I question how much more can happen there without destroying each remaining small building. I would hope that the city enacts relatively draconian protections sooner rather than later. Limiting tear-downs and new construction between Downtown and OSU will motivate growth on Cleveland, Main, Parsons, South High, Franklinton, etc. I don't think the city should do anything remotely "draconian" in nature. Draconian flies in the face of sensible, IMO. I can see having a good oversight over what is happening, but severe limitations will not just cause growth to go where it does not want to go-there will be loss. Those other areas will start to boom when people decide to discover them and want to be there. You just can't force growth like that, and you can't predict where people will go if you severely limit growth in one area. it may go right outside the city...people are fickle and unpredictable. JMHO.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati, which is not a good thing, plus it will lose small-time owners who rent to local businesses in favor of national chains. Cincinnati has height limits in Mt. Adams and Over-the-Rhine. Otherwise, Mt. Adams isn't a historic area and OTR's historic protections are mild. Covington, KY has stricter historical regulations than does Cincinnati. So I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that Cincinnati is preserved in amber, to its detriment.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments.
April 10, 20187 yr Posters were warned previously by ColDayMan to get back on the topic of Short North development. This is not the thread to discuss Cincinnati development issues.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean?
April 10, 20187 yr The Short North is already pretty well protected by its twin architectural review boards. The smaller-scale, historic contributing buildings haven't been, and won't be allowed to be torn down. Stuff like the former KFC-turned-Checksmart though? Probably (hopefully) not long for this world... Campus is the real neighborhood that needs preservation restrictions, but that likely won't happen as the most egregious offender is often the University itself through Campus Partners However the SN will reach a stage soon where it is basically "built out" (most of German Village has been like this for some time). As that happens, aside from smaller projects that can still squeeze in, development will increasingly spill over elsewhere on its own. We're already seeing this now with the uptick in activity in Fton, OTE, downtown itself, and even Milo
April 10, 20187 yr Posters were warned previously by ColDayMan to get back on the topic of Short North development. This is not the thread to discuss Cincinnati development issues.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property
April 10, 20187 yr From the Short North Design Guidelines, Contributing/historic structures provide a defining character to their districts; rehabilitation and adaptive reuse should be the highest priority. Chapter 3116.017 of the Columbus City Code provides the following definition of a contributing property "at least forty (40) years of age or contributes to the architectural character or historical and architectural significance of a group or district. A noncontributing property is less than forty (40) years of age or does not make such a contribution." Non-contributing buildings do not meet the same qualifications as contributing buildings (defined above). However, the same provisions apply in terms of review of exterior work proposals, demolition requests and the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness apply to non-contributing properties located in a Columbus Registry District. Non-contributing buildings often serve to knit the building fabric/streetscape together and should not be viewed in the same way as vacant lots, often referred to as 'missing teeth‛. Changes to such properties have impacts on the surrounding properties in the district and contribute to the streetscape; even if the individual structures themselves are less significant architecturally or historically than others in the area. These maps are from 2011. Since then, exactly one contributing structure has been approved for demo (Grandview Mercantile), which is a sprawling single-story retail showroom, not a small scale, fine grain, or multi story mixed-use building
April 10, 20187 yr These maps are from 2011. Since then, exactly one contributing structure has been approved for demo (Grandview Mercantile), which is a sprawling single-story retail showroom, noa small scale, fine gt rain, or mixed-use building. Thanks for those maps. Very helpful. Even the classification of the single-story Grandview Mercantile building as a "contributing structure" was not universally agreed upon.
April 10, 20187 yr Even the classification of the single-story Grandview Mercantile building as a "contributing structure" was not universally agreed upon. Yeah, that one and a couple others I would say should not really be defined as contributing. The Paradise Garage building just north of Price will also likely be demo-ed at some point which I don't see as problematic. Either way, the SN isn't in danger of turning into the Banks. Pretty much everything shown in green is here to stay. What really stands out from those maps to me is how underdeveloped the whole strip has been for so long. We're just now catching up really to having a fully active urban corridor And while High St is certainly the most noteworthy street in Columbus, it's far from being the only one. But it does provide a living, breathing, very tangible example of what's possible here for any of our other streets. It's a lot easier to imagine how Parsons or Broad or Long or Main or Cleveland, etc might look in the future if they realized their full potential by taking a walk down High. The Short North shows what's possible in Columbus, we already have it and can do it again, you don't have to take a drive to Chicago or wherever to see it Also, I'd love to participate in a conversation about how different neighborhoods in the state have succeeded and what works, or doesn't, and what can be learned from each, but this probably isn't the thread for it. Maybe someone could start one in the city discussions section?
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this.
April 10, 20187 yr The SN has something basic that is actually really hard to find in the Midwest (outside of Chicago) on a large scale. A long stretch of mixed-use on BOTH sides, unbroken for the most part with no long blank walls. If you start with that you are well on your way.
April 10, 20187 yr The SN has something basic that is actually really hard to find in the Midwest (outside of Chicago) on a large scale. A long stretch of mixed-use on BOTH sides, unbroken for the most part with no long blank walls. If you start with that you are well on your way. Yeah, none of the other avenues in Columbus have quite what High was starting with. The big difference between Cincinnati and Columbus in this regard is that Vine St.'s commercial storefronts end abruptly at the bottom of the hill and can't possibly attract any foot traffic from the university. Plus, commercial activity is spread out throughout OTR and not limited to the same extent to the central thoroughfare. Definitely, one of the unusual characteristics of Columbus is that all of the action is concentrated around relatively narrow High St., but Summit & 4th are wide. So is Neil. I can't think of another area of the country where something comparable exists.
April 10, 20187 yr The SN has something basic that is actually really hard to find in the Midwest (outside of Chicago) on a large scale. A long stretch of mixed-use on BOTH sides, unbroken for the most part with no long blank walls. If you start with that you are well on your way. Yeah, none of the other avenues in Columbus have quite what High was starting with. The big difference between Cincinnati and Columbus in this regard is that Vine St.'s commercial storefronts end abruptly at the bottom of the hill and can't possibly attract any foot traffic from the university. Plus, commercial activity is spread out throughout OTR and not limited to the same extent to the central thoroughfare. Definitely, one of the unusual characteristics of Columbus is that all of the action is concentrated around relatively narrow High St., but Summit & 4th are wide. So is Neil. I can't think of another area of the country where something comparable exists. Short North isn't successful because of its form. Success can take many forms. Both Dallas and Manhattan are successful. It's successful because it has access to a rapidly growing metro economy. Creating the right urban form doesn't actually cause economic growth, it just structures it's patterns.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this. No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not.
April 10, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this. No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. I'm not convinced. Buildings of different ages have always occupied most american cities. It's just a rationale for the development game.
April 11, 20187 yr Well Short North is in very real danger of losing every single small prewar building in favor of mega-block developments. So it's going to end up looking like The Banks in Cincinnati. No its not. Both sides of High Street (and the residential neighborhoods behind High) are governed by very strong historic districts. The Victorian Village Commission on the west side of High and the Italian Village Commission on the east side of High. Every surface lot and non-contributing building in the Short North is danger of going away - but not the contributing prewar buildings. And we've see this, as major projects like the Pizzuti Hotel and Office project - built on two surface parking lots - and the White Castle and UDF projects - built on former suburban-style fast-food/convenience sites. Now at some point all of these surface parking and non-contributing sites will get built on. But we're not nearly at that point yet. In the meantime, we've seen "Short North style" developments move north the Short North's 5th Avenue boundary and fill in the previous gap between the Short North and Ohio State. And if those additional High Street sites get built out, there's always 4th Street in Italian Village, as well as the entire Downtown that would welcome additional "Short North style" developments. What does "non-contributing building" mean? Buildings that don't contribute to the architectural integrity or quality of a particular historic district. Contributing would be the 1890-1920 and prewar multi-story building that Jake cited. Non-contributing would be the post-WWII or suburban style buildings like the White Caste, UDF and the KFC turned CheckSmart building that was cited. Here's more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_property Sounds highly subjective. It's just a matter of liking it or not. Let's just be honest about all of this. No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. I'm not convinced. Buildings of different ages have always occupied most american cities. It's just a rationale for the development game. Contributing Building: The National Park Service, which administers the National Register of Historic Places, defines a contributing resource as ‚a building, site, structure, or object adding to the historic significance of a property.‛ Chapter 3116.017 of the Columbus City Code provides the following definition that a contributing property ‚at least forty (40) years of age or contributes to the architectural character or historical and architectural significance of a group or district. A noncontributing property is less than forty (40) years of age or does not make such a contribution.” Page 3.2 https://www.columbus.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=80919 If you remain unconvinced, please take your complaint to the National Park Service. “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.” -Friedrich Nietzsche
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 I can't believe that a "Short North expert" like Jake doesn't know the over 60-year history of the Goody Boy restaurant! It's contributing for that and its iconic sign. See JYP's further explanation of contributing below. Contributing Building: The National Park Service, which administers the National Register of Historic Places, defines a contributing resource as ‚a building, site, structure, or object adding to the historic significance of a property.‛ Chapter 3116.017 of the Columbus City Code provides the following definition that a contributing property ‚at least forty (40) years of age or contributes to the architectural character or historical and architectural significance of a group or district. A noncontributing property is less than forty (40) years of age or does not make such a contribution.” Page 3.2 https://www.columbus.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=80919 If you remain unconvinced, please take your complaint to the National Park Service. For those that are not familiar with how contributing vs non-contributing really works in an historic district, don't let Jake and Matthew confuse you. Probably 90 percent of the buildings designated contributing vs non-contributing can be agreed upon by virtually everyone. It's only the one's on the margin that get argued over.
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 That used to be a very suburbanized, car-centric spot. Its current incarnation is much safer for pedestrians.
April 11, 20187 yr Just because a building is non-contributing also doesn't mean that it will be demolished. Just that it can be. I don't think that the diner is contributing to the historic district, but I'm glad that it was saved, because an unusual building can often create an interesting non sequitur in urban neighborhoods. However if a developer wanted to buy it and put up a mid-rise, they probably could.
April 11, 20187 yr I can't believe that a "Short North expert" like Jake doesn't know the over 60-year history of the Goody Boy restaurant! It's contributing for that and its iconic sign. I've never been to it. It looks like it was expanded since I lived there 10 years ago. I used to live on the last block of Chittenden near the tracks, back when it was pretty rough. I lived there when Little Brothers was still alive.
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 That used to be a very suburbanized, car-centric spot. Its current incarnation is much safer for pedestrians. The section of High which "Goody Boy" is located isn't as "tower" happy as the rest of the Short North outside of the Jackson. You have Skully's across the street, Standard and the new Food Hall as prime examples. The rest of the buildings are max 2-4 stories and as was previously mentioned "contributing" structures. What I would like to see happen is the city adding a 2-4 story parking deck on the flat lot next to Skully's. It is going to be needed for the future and would be a wise investment imo. This stems from the data provided at the parking summit which the parking director stated we are one of the cheapest cities in the nation to park. It could easily be fronted with retail and blend seamlessly into the neighborhood.
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 That used to be a very suburbanized, car-centric spot. Its current incarnation is much safer for pedestrians. The section of High which "Goody Boy" is located isn't as "tower" happy as the rest of the Short North outside of the Jackson. You have Skully's across the street, Standard and the new Food Hall as prime examples. The rest of the buildings are max 2-4 stories and as was previously mentioned "contributing" structures. What I would like to see happen is the city adding a 2-4 story parking deck on the flat lot next to Skully's. It is going to be needed for the future and would be a wise investment imo. This stems from the data provided at the parking summit which the parking director stated we are one of the cheapest cities in the nation to park. It could easily be fronted with retail and blend seamlessly into the neighborhood. A parking garage right on High is not going to happen, not unless the ground floor was retail space, and I suspect there would also be a push to build it so that apartments or other floors could be added on top at some point. But a standalone parking garage on High is very unlikely, as it would represent a dead zone, something the neighborhood standards frown upon. This section of High is also going to rapidly change over the next 5 years, I imagine. The Yoga on High building already has redevelopment plans, and the church across the street had a multi-story proposal not long ago (not the church itself, but immediately around it). There is still a lot of underutilized space between 3rd and 7th, including surface lots and single-story buildings. Some of them may be contributing, but I think we'll see proposals that might incorporate the facades, but otherwise new buildings will go into these spots as well.
April 11, 20187 yr No, not really. It's about whether a building in a historic district is actually historic. A White Castle or a Taco Bell in a historic district is "non-contributing" and can be demolished and replaced by a new building. An actual historic building is "contributing" and can not. Is that small donut shop or whatever it is "contributing"? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9858744,-83.0050157,3a,75y,169.86h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqYjOY1LGMf6HNNU5pAPx0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 That used to be a very suburbanized, car-centric spot. Its current incarnation is much safer for pedestrians. The section of High which "Goody Boy" is located isn't as "tower" happy as the rest of the Short North outside of the Jackson. You have Skully's across the street, Standard and the new Food Hall as prime examples. The rest of the buildings are max 2-4 stories and as was previously mentioned "contributing" structures. What I would like to see happen is the city adding a 2-4 story parking deck on the flat lot next to Skully's. It is going to be needed for the future and would be a wise investment imo. This stems from the data provided at the parking summit which the parking director stated we are one of the cheapest cities in the nation to park. It could easily be fronted with retail and blend seamlessly into the neighborhood. A parking garage right on High is not going to happen, not unless the ground floor was retail space, and I suspect there would also be a push to build it so that apartments or other floors could be added on top at some point. But a standalone parking garage on High is very unlikely, as it would represent a dead zone, something the neighborhood standards frown upon. This section of High is also going to rapidly change over the next 5 years, I imagine. The Yoga on High building already has redevelopment plans, and the church across the street had a multi-story proposal not long ago (not the church itself, but immediately around it). There is still a lot of underutilized space between 3rd and 7th, including surface lots and single-story buildings. Some of them may be contributing, but I think we'll see proposals that might incorporate the facades, but otherwise new buildings will go into these spots as well. It would be a smart investment, that flat lot is what's contributing to the parking issues and it's not going to get better. You could offer hourly parking options in a garage and currently that is not the plan for the parking plan. Also they could build it with future plans for conversion along with retail frontage. We have no "public" garages outside of the Hub in Short North and IMO it would alleviate a ton of the congestion. Week days it could be used by construction workers and in the evening by patrons.
Create an account or sign in to comment