December 1, 20204 yr I doubt it will be empty for too long. Surely another theater conglomerate will swoop it up being essentially the only major complex in the core. It needed a pretty major refresh IMO anyway. I would have though AMC might have taken the opportunity to do that now but they might not be investing any real capital given the economic conditions for movies and theaters. In the meantime, hopefully this will drive some business to Gateway especially once things start to get back into some semblance of normalcy next year.
December 1, 20204 yr Wasn't there talk some years ago about redoing this entire complex into a more mixed-use and urban development?
December 1, 20204 yr 1 minute ago, jonoh81 said: Wasn't there talk some years ago about redoing this entire complex into a more mixed-use and urban development? I was actually about to ask if there is potential that this doesn't fill back up and we could see redevelopment in the near future. With the northwest corridor study going on and talks of transit and dense development on Olentangy, I'm not sure how that gets done without this shopping complex being entirely redeveloped.
December 1, 20204 yr 2 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said: I was actually about to ask if there is potential that this doesn't fill back up and we could see redevelopment in the near future. With the northwest corridor study going on and talks of transit and dense development on Olentangy, I'm not sure how that gets done without this shopping complex being entirely redeveloped. It does seem like the perfect place to do a larger development.
December 1, 20204 yr I wish they would but I have a hard time believing the current owners of the property will. It has so much potential. I expect it will take a full selling of the property to hope for something bigger. They lost an opportunity to start that process by building Marshall's instead of a garage in that spot. It also points to their long term priorities if they went to the trouble of creating a suburban big box accommodation so recently. And the tenants are big brand names filling the complex so breaking those leases might also be a sticking point Unlike the ackerman/Olentangy development that was largely outdated with tenants that appeared to be largely ok with losing the location. Perhaps the city can create some irresistable incentives as part of the corridor plan. Edited December 1, 20204 yr by DTCL11
December 1, 20204 yr 8 minutes ago, DTCL11 said: I wish they would but I have a hard time believing the current owners of the property will. It has so much potential. I expect it will take a full selling of the property to hope for something bigger. They lost an opportunity to start that process by building Marshall's instead of a garage in that spot. It also points to their long term priorities if they went to the trouble of creating a suburban big box accommodation so recently. And the tenants are big brand names filling the complex so breaking those leases might also be a sticking point Unlike the ackerman/Olentangy development that was largely outdated with tenants that appeared to be largely ok with losing the location. Perhaps the city can create some irresistable incentives as part of the corridor plan. Perhaps with the impending- supposedly- city zoning changes and the- supposedly- high-capacity transit route coming, they could mandate higher density and mixed-use on the site for any and all future redevelopment. That wouldn't get rid of this very suburban development right away, but it might ensure that whenever the site does get updated, it has to be done in specific ways and adhere to a standard that should've been in place to begin with. But I'm probably being really optimistic about the zoning changes, of which I have serious doubts that they will go far enough or be as forward-thinking as they've suggested.
December 1, 20204 yr 9 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: Perhaps with the impending- supposedly- city zoning changes and the- supposedly- high-capacity transit route coming, they could mandate higher density and mixed-use on the site for any and all future redevelopment. That wouldn't get rid of this very suburban development right away, but it might ensure that whenever the site does get updated, it has to be done in specific ways and adhere to a standard that should've been in place to begin with. But I'm probably being really optimistic about the zoning changes, of which I have serious doubts that they will go far enough or be as forward-thinking as they've suggested. I’m sure if someone offered them enough money, it would be hard to turn down. Never know, I’m sure something will happen!
December 1, 20204 yr It's probably not going to happen near term, what with 60% of 18-29s living with their folks right now. This is up from around 50% only a year ago.
December 1, 20204 yr NBC confirming it will reopen under Phoenix https://www.nbc4i.com/news/local-news/lennox-town-center-movie-theatre-to-reopen-under-new-management/ Phoenix Theatres Entertainment President & CEO Phil Zacheretti confirmed Tuesday that his company will be the new operator of the venue. He says the theatre will remain closed for the next few weeks to allow for changes to be made. He hopes it will reopen before Christmas Day. Doesn't seem like much of a big makeover could be made before the reopening. Hopefully that's in the long term.
December 1, 20204 yr I don't really think it's that bad? I mean it kinda looks like the place to see the d*ck Tracy premiere in 1990 but that's kinda what theaters look like
December 1, 20204 yr To me its like walking into 90s nickelodeon aesthetic. I'm not sure the entry has been repainted since it opened. (I'm sure it has but it doesn't feel like it) New paint, carpet, and some minor edits to the decor will go a long way. That excludes any overhaul for recliners, food service, etc that might be beneficial for continuing to attract new business.
June 3, 20214 yr On 6/22/2020 at 10:55 AM, Columbo said: The 7-story, 164-room Aloft Hotel at 1295 Olentangy River Road opened May 22: http://www.uhdcolumbus.com/aloft https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2020/05/28/aloft-columbus-hotel-opens-in-the-middle-of-a-pand.html The 7-story, 164-room Aloft Hotel at 1295 Olentangy River Road opened one year ago in the middle of the pandemic. Since then I've been looking for some photos of the completed building. For all of last year I didn't come across any. But after researching last weekend, I finally did come across some completed photos. And there are alot of them now(!) New hotel website: https://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/cmhco-aloft-columbus-university-district/ Two photo site links: Google photo search link and Photographer's photo slideshow link Here are a few exterior views of the completed Aloft Hotel at 1295 Olentangy River Road: Aerial view showing the hotel and surrounding area. Prime location in the middle of alot of activity. From left to right in the below aerial: Downtown Columbus in the background; 315; part of the Olentangy River; Olentangy River Road; Gowdy Field redevelopment; Grandview Yard development: Other than its height and a few architectural details, the hotel building isn't very remarkable during the day. But it does liven up some at night with a good exterior lighting setup: Additionally, the Aloft Hotel chain is known for their liberal use of bright colors. And the Olentangy River Road location has that in the porte cochere (vehicular arrival/drop-off area) that runs through the middle of the building: Plus, the second floor indoor/outdoor bar that cantilevers over the porte cochere:
June 5, 20214 yr https://www.thisweeknews.com/story/business/2021/06/03/kroger-out-resort-amenities-in-university-city-olentangy-river-road/7449473002/ The City - a six-story mixed-use building built in the 1961 University City Shopping Center just north of the Ohio State University - celebrated its grand opening last week. The six-story, $75 million building has 121,000 sq. ft. of retail space on the ground floor and 266 apartments in a mix of studio, one- and two-bedroom units on the five floors above. The article and the headline mention that the Kroger store, previously in the single-story structure demolished to make way for the new six-story building, will not be returning. This isn't really surprising since Kroger said in 2017 that they wouldn't be returning to the new building. But according to the developer in the article, they did set aside 90,000 of the 121,000 sq. ft. ground-floor retail space, if Kroger changed their mind. From the above linked article: Skip Weiler, president of the developer, the Robert Weiler Co., said he was surprised when Kroger said it would not return to the center after closing its store in 2017 in anticipation of the renovation. "We designed it to accommodate them," he said. "We thought they would move back in." Also from the article: "Kroger spokeswoman Amy McCormick said the store's lease was never renewed and the store has no plans to return to University City" and "Weiler and Sydney Federer, who is managing the retail leasing for Casto, say they would consider another grocery store anchor for the center, but are also looking to other potential users. As for the apartment rental side, The City complex had expected to draw workers from major nearby employers including OSU, OhioHealth, the Wexner Medical Center and CAS - but many of those workers have yet to return to the office. "As they start to go back, we're seeing traffic pick up," said Lauren Davidson, who manages apartment rental for The City. To compensate, Davidson said the building is offering two free months rent and has adjusted its marketing to target more students, especially graduate students. Here are a few additional photos of The City at University City Shopping Center from: https://www.thisweeknews.com/story/business/2021/06/03/kroger-out-resort-amenities-in-university-city-olentangy-river-road/7449473002/ The six-story building is topped by the "Rooftop on Five" amenity level which includes a lounge, yoga studio, fitness center, and a rooftop terrace with a pool:
October 11, 20213 yr Driving on ORR between 3rd and 5th avenues - noticed that the far right southbound lane is closed with some major equipment on site. Not sure if this is purely infrastructure related or the beginnings of the dedicated BRT project. Does anyone have information on this?
October 11, 20213 yr Speaking of the Olentangy BRT route, has anyone really looked at the station placement? There are 15 proposed stations across 14 legs from Downtown to Bethel Road in the first phase, and just a single leg actually meets standard BRT station distance separation, which is roughly 1/4-1/3 mile in urban areas an up to 1/2 mile in more suburban areas. The other 13 are all way too far apart, some up to 3x further than the standard. Since the success of transit systems is judged in the first year or so, I worry that by placing the stations so far apart, ridership won't be nearly as high as it could be, meaning the political will to expand the line or add stations later decreases greatly. There is no reason to have some stations 1 1/2 miles apart. How is that convenient? One of the reasons the CMAX was a failure in terms of being BRT is also because stations were too far apart, among other problems. I get the feeling the city associates station placement distance as the main driver of route speed, but in the process, they are sacrificing easy usage. If people have to walk further to get to a station, the advantages of a faster bus are immediately lost. The speed is gained through dedicated lanes and signal priority, not just having fewer stations further apart. Edited October 11, 20213 yr by jonoh81
October 11, 20213 yr 11 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: Speaking of the Olentangy BRT route, has anyone really looked at the station placement? There are 15 proposed stations across 13 legs from Downtown to Bethel Road in the first phase, and just a single leg actually meets standard BRT station distance separation, which is roughly 1/4-1/3 mile in urban areas an up to 1/2 mile in more suburban areas. The other 12 are all way too far apart, some up to 3x further than the standard. Since the success of transit systems are judged in the first year or so, I worry that by placing the stations so far apart, ridership won't be nearly as high as it could be, meaning the political will to expand the line or add stations later decreases greatly. There is no reason to have some stations 1 1/2 miles apart. How is that convenient? One of the reasons the CMAX was a failure in terms of being BRT is also because stations were too far apart, among other problems. I get the feeling the city associates station placement distance as the main driver of route speed, but in the process, they are sacrificing easy usage. You definitely don't want your stops too far apart, but you also don't want stops that don't serve much of a purpose. You have to have the surrounding the population and job numbers for a stop to make sense. There are certainly stretches, such as the stretch between Riverside Hospital and Henderson, where a stop would unnecessarily increase the route time. Also, there are certain stretches where a stop probably isn't necessary now, but where a stop could be added in the future if development occurs. There's certainly a risk of not having enough stations, as you mentioned. But, there is also a risk of having too many stations. Unnecessary stations reduce the cost effectiveness and efficiency of the overall system. If it takes you too long to get where you need to go, you'll opt to use a car instead. And if enough people do that, the politicians take away the funding. You gotta hit the sweet spot.
October 11, 20213 yr 3 hours ago, NightNectar said: Driving on ORR between 3rd and 5th avenues - noticed that the far right southbound lane is closed with some major equipment on site. Not sure if this is purely infrastructure related or the beginnings of the dedicated BRT project. Does anyone have information on this? Its looked like infrastructure work based on the equipment. What kind of infrastructure, I have no clue.
October 12, 20213 yr 18 hours ago, cbussoccer said: You definitely don't want your stops too far apart, but you also don't want stops that don't serve much of a purpose. You have to have the surrounding the population and job numbers for a stop to make sense. There are certainly stretches, such as the stretch between Riverside Hospital and Henderson, where a stop would unnecessarily increase the route time. Also, there are certain stretches where a stop probably isn't necessary now, but where a stop could be added in the future if development occurs. There's certainly a risk of not having enough stations, as you mentioned. But, there is also a risk of having too many stations. Unnecessary stations reduce the cost effectiveness and efficiency of the overall system. If it takes you too long to get where you need to go, you'll opt to use a car instead. And if enough people do that, the politicians take away the funding. You gotta hit the sweet spot. Studies show that, in general, people will only walk 1/4 mile or less to a bus stop, and up to a 1/2 mile for a train station. Those distances can vary a little depending on route conditions and the quality of the stations, but for the most part, these are the maximum distances people will travel. It is not just that fewer stations at greater distances mean fewer people who live along the route will walk to a station, but fewer people overall will even have that option. The ORR route census tracts contain roughly 47,500 people, but less than half live within a 1/4 mile of a proposed station. You also have to build infrastructure not just for what exists, but also plan for an expected future. It's more difficult- and more expensive- to go back and add stuff later than it is to build it all initially. Furthermore, as I said, transit systems get absolutely no benefit of the doubt from the public the way roads do. A route has to basically be immediately successful with plentiful ridership. If it isn't, it will threaten the future of all other potential lines.
October 12, 20213 yr I don't know if the expensive SFH on 1/4-1/2 acre+ lots is ripe for redevelopment though. I'm talking about north of Ackerman mostly.
October 12, 20213 yr Yeah you've just got huge sections of ORR that are just surrounded by a cemetery, by OSU athletic facilities (not open to the public), or developed neighborhoods of desirable single family homes, putting a station every quarter mile on ORR just because you can doesn't really make sense. This might harsh, but if you can't make BRT work on Cleveland Ave bookended by Easton and Downtown, I don't really have high hopes for ORR. Good luck convincing UA/UA adjacent residents to jump on your bus, regardless of how far away a station is.
October 12, 20213 yr 38 minutes ago, 17thState said: Yeah you've just got huge sections of ORR that are just surrounded by a cemetery, by OSU athletic facilities (not open to the public), or developed neighborhoods of desirable single family homes, putting a station every quarter mile on ORR just because you can doesn't really make sense. This might harsh, but if you can't make BRT work on Cleveland Ave bookended by Easton and Downtown, I don't really have high hopes for ORR. Good luck convincing UA/UA adjacent residents to jump on your bus, regardless of how far away a station is. Cleveland Ave isn’t true BRT. The benefits of BRT are speed. They have right of ways and don’t share lanes with cars. True BRT can be great, if they do it right.
October 12, 20213 yr 2 hours ago, 17thState said: Yeah you've just got huge sections of ORR that are just surrounded by a cemetery, by OSU athletic facilities (not open to the public), or developed neighborhoods of desirable single family homes, putting a station every quarter mile on ORR just because you can doesn't really make sense. This might harsh, but if you can't make BRT work on Cleveland Ave bookended by Easton and Downtown, I don't really have high hopes for ORR. Good luck convincing UA/UA adjacent residents to jump on your bus, regardless of how far away a station is. I think that's more an argument about the choice of route. Clearly as a first route in a new system, it leaves something to be desired from a few standpoints.
October 13, 20213 yr 14 hours ago, 17thState said: Yeah you've just got huge sections of ORR that are just surrounded by a cemetery, by OSU athletic facilities (not open to the public), or developed neighborhoods of desirable single family homes, putting a station every quarter mile on ORR just because you can doesn't really make sense. This might harsh, but if you can't make BRT work on Cleveland Ave bookended by Easton and Downtown, I don't really have high hopes for ORR. Good luck convincing UA/UA adjacent residents to jump on your bus, regardless of how far away a station is. The whole "wealthy suburbs won't use public transit" thing is honestly just nonsense. I use to drive through UA every single morning to get to work pre-pandemic and there were always people waiting at the few bus stops I saw in UA every single day. Some people just don't want to drive regardless of how much money they have. These were well dressed people in suits and what not obviously commuting to downtown.
October 13, 20213 yr 1 hour ago, TIm said: The whole "wealthy suburbs won't use public transit" thing is honestly just nonsense. I use to drive through UA every single morning to get to work pre-pandemic and there were always people waiting at the few bus stops I saw in UA every single day. Some people just don't want to drive regardless of how much money they have. These were well dressed people in suits and what not obviously commuting to downtown. I don't think the argument is that wealthy people don't use transit, but that they're less likely to use transit. However, if you're going to attract more people who want to give up driving, you have to give them a convenient, safe, nearby system that makes giving up the car worth it to them. Car culture has been pounded into Americans for more than a century, so it's always an uphill battle.
October 13, 20213 yr 58 minutes ago, jonoh81 said: I don't think the argument is that wealthy people don't use transit, but that they're less likely to use transit. However, if you're going to attract more people who want to give up driving, you have to give them a convenient, safe, nearby system that makes giving up the car worth it to them. Car culture has been pounded into Americans for more than a century, so it's always an uphill battle. Public transit outreaching into the adjacent suburban communities is only going to become more and more necessary as the city continue to grow and more people are commuting downtown everyday. When it's either a 45min car ride or 15min bus ride, people will start taking the bus. Edited October 13, 20213 yr by TIm
October 13, 20213 yr A rail line connecting Columbus to Newark would be awesome....ONLY if it reduces time considerably however!! I am talking about making the trip 10 mins. Right now, its 18 mins from Newark to New Albany, so they would have to make a rail line that makes it so that it truly is the better option for many people. I just don't think any of the proposals out there do that.
October 13, 20213 yr 1 minute ago, OhioFinest said: A rail line connecting Columbus to Newark would be awesome....ONLY if it reduces time considerably however!! I am talking about making the trip 10 mins. Right now, its 18 mins from Newark to New Albany, so they would have to make a rail line that makes it so that it truly is the better option for many people. I just don't think any of the proposals out there do that. That would be awesome, I just don't think enough people are commuting in from that area to justify the cost. Only 180K people living in Licking County and a good chunk of that would be nowhere near this rail line, plus a good amount of those people live and work within the county. What's more likely is they would add additional lanes to 161 in New Albany since that's a major major bottleneck right now. Just two lanes and have a series of highly trafficked on ramps merging in right in this area. This would be fine if New Albany was still a farming community and Newark wasn't growing, but neither of those are the case.
October 13, 20213 yr 4 minutes ago, TIm said: That would be awesome, I just don't think enough people are commuting in from that area to justify the cost. Only 180K people living in Licking County and a good chunk of that would be nowhere near this rail line, plus a good amount of those people live and work within the county. What's more likely is they would add additional lanes to 161 in New Albany since that's a major major bottleneck right now. Just two lanes and have a series of highly trafficked on ramps merging in right in this area. This would be fine if New Albany was still a farming community and Newark wasn't growing, but neither of those are the case. I agree with that...the only way i could see it happening is Columbus to Pittsburgh with a stop in Newark. Maybe that would justify the cost? All i know is the rail line runs right through downtown Newark and has an incredible Train Station already there for use.
October 14, 20213 yr 8 hours ago, OhioFinest said: A rail line connecting Columbus to Newark would be awesome....ONLY if it reduces time considerably however!! I am talking about making the trip 10 mins. Right now, its 18 mins from Newark to New Albany, so they would have to make a rail line that makes it so that it truly is the better option for many people. I just don't think any of the proposals out there do that. Can you cite any studies that would show what ridership would be? Would it be worth it? Especially with a nice convenient freeway already connecting Newark and New Albany. The numbers have to be right, and I suspect that this line would not be a priority. Sorry I know how pro-Newark you are(I am too), but how feasible would this be? *Given another decade or two of roaring development between these two areas, things might be very different in a good way. The North is already crowded, the West is a no go because of the Darby Creeks, nobody wants to go South except for maybe the edges like Grove City and Canal Winchester/Pickerington, and that leaves the East-and with Pataskala a big 30+ square miles of slowish growth, that leaves the stretches along 70 and 161-which basically is leading to....Greater Newark.
October 14, 20213 yr 10 hours ago, Toddguy said: Can you cite any studies that would show what ridership would be? Would it be worth it? Especially with a nice convenient freeway already connecting Newark and New Albany. The numbers have to be right, and I suspect that this line would not be a priority. Sorry I know how pro-Newark you are(I am too), but how feasible would this be? *Given another decade or two of roaring development between these two areas, things might be very different in a good way. The North is already crowded, the West is a no go because of the Darby Creeks, nobody wants to go South except for maybe the edges like Grove City and Canal Winchester/Pickerington, and that leaves the East-and with Pataskala a big 30+ square miles of slowish growth, that leaves the stretches along 70 and 161-which basically is leading to....Greater Newark. I don't have any studies. I fully understand that a line going from Columbus to Newark would only exist as part of a larger Columbus to Pittsburgh line. One can dream though. I will keep saying it, Licking County is where Delaware County was in 1990...the boom is upon us.
October 15, 20213 yr On 10/14/2021 at 7:14 AM, OhioFinest said: I don't have any studies. I fully understand that a line going from Columbus to Newark would only exist as part of a larger Columbus to Pittsburgh line. One can dream though. I will keep saying it, Licking County is where Delaware County was in 1990...the boom is upon us. I agree and I would LOVE a line from Cbus to Pburgh going through Newark! C'mon Amtrak!!! *NYC to Pburgh to Cbus to Indy to Chicago would be ideal-to be able to take a train to either Chicago or NYC would be epic.
January 19, 20223 yr Weiler's City development gets ready to welcome retail tenants, including out-of-state bakery After wrapping up the multifamily portion of The City development on Olentangy River Road this past spring, Robert Weiler Co. is finalizing the project's retail tenant lineup. The six-story, 266-unit building has 130,000 square feet of retail space available, said Skip Weiler, president of the company. Weiler said the company is in negotiations with several restaurants and also hopes to land a grocery store. A bakery called Tous Les Jours, a Great Clips and a liquor store have already signed leases. Sydney Federer, a leasing agent with Casto, said Tous Les Jours is a new-to-market concept that is a confluence of Asian and French cultures, like bubble tea and french pastries. The company's U.S. headquarters is in California and the global head quarters is in Korea. There are 49 other stores in the U.S. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2022/01/18/the-city.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 19, 20223 yr Wow, both Paris Baguette and Tous les Jours in Columbus!? Never thought I'd see the day. That The City development is a huge improvement over the strip mall that was there and seems to be keeping a somewhat interesting store lineup in the tenant mix.
January 19, 20223 yr 29 minutes ago, CMHOhio said: Wow, both Paris Baguette and Tous les Jours in Columbus!? Never thought I'd see the day. That The City development is a huge improvement over the strip mall that was there and seems to be keeping a somewhat interesting store lineup in the tenant mix. It’s still super sad that it wasn’t built right along the road
January 19, 20223 yr 17 minutes ago, VintageLife said: It’s still super sad that it wasn’t built right along the road There's probably some funny things with all those outlots and leases. While mostly owned by the same entity, my guess is Canes and McDonald's are going to have some hefty costs associated with, and I use this term with a grain of salt, arbitrarily forcing them to give up those buildings and locations. That canes alone is INSANE when it comes to business. The others were fine giving them up so I'd be curious to see if in fact Canes and McDonald's are what prevented it. The good news it there's plenty of space and time so a future phase or phases can easily be added.
January 19, 20223 yr 10 hours ago, DTCL11 said: There's probably some funny things with all those outlots and leases. While mostly owned by the same entity, my guess is Canes and McDonald's are going to have some hefty costs associated with, and I use this term with a grain of salt, arbitrarily forcing them to give up those buildings and locations. That canes alone is INSANE when it comes to business. The others were fine giving them up so I'd be curious to see if in fact Canes and McDonald's are what prevented it. The good news it there's plenty of space and time so a future phase or phases can easily be added. Oh I get it, and I’m sure over time the whole lot will develop. Especially if they do the BRT line along there.
April 14, 20223 yr Miller's Ale House locations to be demolished for new development “A developer is trading in its old Miller’s Ale House for a trio of popular coffee and restaurant brands. Northstar Realty will begin demolition soon on the former Miller’s Ale House location at 1201 Olentangy River Road. In its place the company plans to build new spaces housing Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers, Chipotle and Starbucks. According to documents filed with the city of Columbus, the Raising Canes will be 3,600 square feet, the Starbucks 2,100 square feet and the Chipotle 2,400 square feet.” https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2022/04/14/millers-ale-house-locations-to-be-demolished-for.html?utm_source=st&utm_medium=en&utm_campaign=BN&utm_content=co&ana=e_co_BN&j=27371919&senddate=2022-04-14
April 14, 20223 yr Absolutely not. Apparently today is about raging at developers. The city should have denied this and demanded major mixed use. What good does it do to have one hand looking to spend billions in the first BRT Corridor and in the other allow developers to tear down suburban out lots to put in new ones?! And by building new just a mere couple years before a BRT is to be initiated, it ensures this location will be entrenched in no density car centric development contrary to the need or intents of mass transit for many more years. At least 2 of these are drive thru restaurants too. Most likely all 3. The absolutely most backwards thing to approve. Hey look, you can ride a super expensive dedicated lane bus and do a fast food chain drive through crawl. This is probably one of the most enraging development stories of late. Like WTF. Big. Fat. Nope. Edited April 14, 20223 yr by DTCL11
April 14, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, DTCL11 said: Absolutely not. Apparently today is about raging at developers. The city should have denied this and demanded major mixed use. What good does it do to have one hand looking to spend billions in the first BRT Corridor and in the other allow developers to tear down suburban out lots to put in new ones?! And by building new just a mere couple years before a BRT is to be initiated, it ensures this location will be entrenched in no density car centric development contrary to the need or intents of mass transit for many more years. At least 2 of these are drive thru restaurants too. Most likely all 3. The absolutely most backwards thing to approve. Hey look, you can ride a super expensive dedicated lane bus and do a fast food chain drive through crawl. This is probably one of the most enraging development stories of late. Like WTF. Big. Fat. Nope. Yeah. I saw crews clearing stuff out into dumpsters today. It got me thinking about how tearing this down could lead to the first phase of a nice, dense MUD. Then this news 🙄
April 14, 20223 yr Hey, let's throw in a Drive Thru CVS while we are at it! That strip is missing an Arby's and a Drive Thru Pizza Hut. Let's tear down the Fish Market and Cap City to make it happen!
April 14, 20223 yr Disposable architecture. How old is the Miller's building? 9 years? These new builds can be torn down too in the future for a T.O.D. project.
April 14, 20223 yr 10 minutes ago, Pablo said: Disposable architecture. How old is the Miller's building? 9 years? These new builds can be torn down too in the future for a T.O.D. project. Hopefully! This is not the type of development that is needed along olentangy at all.
April 14, 20223 yr 22 minutes ago, Pablo said: Disposable architecture. How old is the Miller's building? 9 years? These new builds can be torn down too in the future for a T.O.D. project. In theory, maybe, but these are powerhouse leases. Unless Northstar Realty is building clauses that allow them to break the leases, there is a very real chance we could end up seeing the same issue we have with CVS in VV or the reason why they couldn't touch the McDonalds or Canes at ORR and Ackerman. Another single story like the building to the south, sure. But I have very serious concerns about 3 major drive thru corporate and/or franchise builds. Especially Canes and Starbucks. I'd bet money that it won't be as easy as rebuilding in 5 or 10 years. Edit: FWIW, Canes is one of the more expensive fast food Franchises to open. Opening a Franchise Canes new build can cost between 1 and 2 million dollars. The architecture may be disposable. But the investment in it isn't adding to the concern. Edited April 14, 20223 yr by DTCL11
April 14, 20223 yr 29 minutes ago, DTCL11 said: Absolutely not. Apparently today is about raging at developers. The city should have denied this and demanded major mixed use. What good does it do to have one hand looking to spend billions in the first BRT Corridor and in the other allow developers to tear down suburban out lots to put in new ones?! And by building new just a mere couple years before a BRT is to be initiated, it ensures this location will be entrenched in no density car centric development contrary to the need or intents of mass transit for many more years. At least 2 of these are drive thru restaurants too. Most likely all 3. The absolutely most backwards thing to approve. Hey look, you can ride a super expensive dedicated lane bus and do a fast food chain drive through crawl. This is probably one of the most enraging development stories of late. Like WTF. Big. Fat. Nope. Based on the plans submitted to the city, all three will have drive thrus. It looks like this all fits within the current zoning for the site, so there's probably not much the city can do. They can't disallow a development that complies with the zoning code, so until City Council begins changing the zoning code, this type of development can continue to be built here.
April 14, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, .justin said: Based on the plans submitted to the city, all three will have drive thrus. It looks like this all fits within the current zoning for the site, so there's probably not much the city can do. They can't disallow a development that complies with the zoning code, so until City Council begins changing the zoning code, this type of development can continue to be built here. Grrrrr... (at the city. Not you. Lol) But they can deny a demolition permit with much more freedom, no? Edited April 14, 20223 yr by DTCL11
April 14, 20223 yr Lastly, an interesting investment by Starbucks who just remodeled the Starbucks Drive Thru and Cafe 2,700 ft to the North and have a successful Drive Thru Only Location 3,800 ft to the West of this new build. 3 Starbucks Drive Thrus within a little more than a half mile of each other would be the highest concentration (of drive thrus) in the region. I wonder if they'll move to close to the 5th Ave Location. Otherwise, what a blessing it will be to have 3 drive thru Starbucks clustered in this area. We are so blessed. 🙏 1 like = 1 prayer of thankfulness Sorry. I get the zoning is the big issue but still. My mind is just boggled by this.
Create an account or sign in to comment