Mixed-Use Development Proposed for West Fifth Avenue

 

 

Preliminary plans for a mixed-use development on the former Fifth Avenue Elementary site in Dennison Place have been presented to the zoning committee of the University Area Commission (UAC).

 

The development was also the subject of a neighborhood meeting in September, in which residents provided some initial feedback on the proposal to the developer, Upper Arlington-based Vision Development.

 

More below:

https://www.columbusunderground.com/mixed-use-development-proposed-for-west-fifth-ave-bw1

 

^5th Ave. has the potential to transform into a great commercial corridor from Tri-Village to Cleveland Ave.

^^I am getting an error message trying to access CU for this article. Hopefully just a temporary problem.

I drove by the northern border of Battelle (on King) last night, and the whole northeastern part of their property is fenced off. I know they demolished a building there a couple years ago. Is anything else going on there?

I walk through their campus every day. They expanded their parking lots on the King avenue side (presumably to make up for the lot they are losing south of 5th Ave). They had a large lawn there before, now it's parking most of the way up to King. The fencing is just blocking off the parking lot expansion and landscaping, the completion of which appears imminent; people are already parking in the new spaces.

 

They have also opened up half of one of their interior buildings and started excavating a new pit next to it, I am not sure what they are planning there. Yesterday they were bringing in a cement truck. 

 

Their parking lot rearrangement also coincided with them removing the pedestrian sidewalk from Perry to Perry between 5th and King, which was not neighborly. 

 

 

Edited December 14, 20186 yr by HarrisonWester2

5 minutes ago, HarrisonWester2 said:

I walk through their campus every day. They expanded their parking lots on the King avenue side (presumably to make up for the lot they are losing south of 5th Ave). They had a large lawn there before, now it's parking most of the way up to King. The fencing is just blocking off the parking lot expansion and landscaping, the completion of which appears imminent; people are already parking in the new spaces.

 

They have also opened up half of one of their interior buildings and started excavating a new pit next to it, I am not sure what they are planning there. Yesterday they were bringing in a cement truck. 

 

Their parking lot rearrangement also coincided with them removing the pedestrian sidewalk from Perry to Perry at 5th and King, which was not neighborly. 

 

 

 

Thanks for the update!

On 6/22/2016 at 2:16 PM, ColDayMan said:

250 New Apartments Could Be on Tap for Harrison West

 

More apartments could be coming soon to the western edge of Harrison West. Developer Michael Schiff of Schiff Property Group is in contract to buy the seven-acre Superior Beverage site at 871 Ingleside Street.

 

Schiff told Columbus Underground that he is working with Scott Pickett to acquire the parcel, which sits at the western edge of Buttles Avenue. Schiff and Pickett were also partners in Trotters Park, a 144-unit apartment complex built on 3.4 acres at the southeast corner of Buttles and Michigan Avenue.

 

More below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/250-new-apartments-could-be-on-tap-for-harrison-west-bw1

These are nearing completion as I saw while driving by on 315. Will be a nice spot to live if you're a Crew fan. Also, another 250 units opening in the 43215. Should reach +7,000 by 2020.

On 7/31/2017 at 5:35 PM, wpcc88 said:

 

This project has been shuttered all summer, anyone know what happened?  The stairwells and elevator shaft are both complete or near completion too,  just plain weird.

 

This is still just sitting. Some framing done for the retail spot. Looks like the owner (SWAC IV LLC) is delinquent on their property tax, too...

12 hours ago, aderwent said:

 

This is still just sitting. Some framing done for the retail spot. Looks like the owner (SWAC IV LLC) is delinquent on their property tax, too...

This should restart shortly there are new permits under review to complete the project. 

Looks like a developer filed with the city engineering department for the review of a 234 unit apartment building at 1131 N High St.

The current use is Albans Auto Repair directly across from the south campus Kroger. The plot does extend all the way back to Wall St, but honestly thats a fairly small plot of land for that many units and parking as detailed in the application. Im fascinated to see what the height and massing will be when this gets announced. 

 

For comparison -

Uncommon Commons (1400 N High St) - Built 154 units w/parking - 1.14 acres

Alban Auto (1131 N High St) - Proposed 234 units w/parking - 0.41 acres

 

 

Edited January 17, 20196 yr by DevolsDance

234 units even if it's all studios is going to be a tight fit unless the project is going to be out of scale tall for the area. I'm interested to see what this will look like. 

 

I agree on the Kroger parking lot facing N High being wasted space but they share blame with the City of Columbus for permitting that development as designed on the premier street of the city. 

I hear that grass lot on the Kroger property could become available for a smallish project.

12 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

I hear that grass lot on the Kroger property could become available for a smallish project.

I think there were plans for a two story building back when this project was announced. Don't know the status.

Grocers are very fickle about parking and generally hate parking structures. That said, the parking lot is definitely well used.

15 hours ago, DevolsDance said:

Looks like a developer filed with the city engineering department for the review of a 234 unit apartment building at 1131 N High St.

The current use is Albans Auto Repair directly across from the south campus Kroger. The plot does extend all the way back to Wall St, but honestly thats a fairly small plot of land for that many units and parking as detailed in the application. Im fascinated to see what the height and massing will be when this gets announced. 

 

For comparison -

Uncommon Commons (1400 N High St) - Built 154 units w/parking - 1.14 acres

Alban Auto (1131 N High St) - Proposed 234 units w/parking - 0.41 acres

 

 

 

The two parcels north of this site are the owners of this parcel as well. That puts it at ~.80 acres. If they're also working with the two parcels that have King frontage that would put it near a full acre. Should be a nice size building regardless.

 

Now about that Library-adjacent hotel...

 

Edit* also it's 1331 N High, not 1131.

Edited January 18, 20196 yr by aderwent

5 hours ago, aderwent said:

 

The two parcels north of this site are the owners of this parcel as well. That puts it at ~.80 acres. If they're also working with the two parcels that have King frontage that would put it near a full acre. Should be a nice size building regardless.

 

Now about that Library-adjacent hotel...

 

Edit* also it's 1331 N High, not 1131.

 

You are correct, sorry about that. 

 

I am interested in seeing how they assemble the site and structure to fit that many units. I would prefer they do not touch any of the row homes adjacent to this but I guess we will be waiting until it's announced to find out. Just a curious little find on the engineering applications. 

 

Hmm, I had completely forgotten about that project. DOA? I hope not. 

140-unit apartment project in the University District clears commission

 

A plan to redevelop a former city school property in the University District has cleared its first hurdle.

 

Brent Wrightsel's Vision Development has worked on plans for a mixed-use project on the site of the former Fifth Avenue Elementary in Dennison Place.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/01/18/140-unit-apartment-project-in-the-university.html

 

 

On 1/18/2019 at 2:57 PM, ColDayMan said:

140-unit apartment project in the University District clears commission

 

A plan to redevelop a former city school property in the University District has cleared its first hurdle.

 

Brent Wrightsel's Vision Development has worked on plans for a mixed-use project on the site of the former Fifth Avenue Elementary in Dennison Place.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/01/18/140-unit-apartment-project-in-the-university.html

 

 

Awesome! Now let's build, build, build!

Did some research... the project will take up all the parcels bound by Clark Pl, King Ave, N High, and N Wall except for the strip of row homes along Clark Pl. 

So the Ohio Exterminator Co. wall sign made famous by Larry Flynt is going away then.

On ‎1‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 7:51 AM, aderwent said:

 

The two parcels north of this site are the owners of this parcel as well. That puts it at ~.80 acres. If they're also working with the two parcels that have King frontage that would put it near a full acre. Should be a nice size building regardless.

 

Now about that Library-adjacent hotel...

 

Edit* also it's 1331 N High, not 1131.

 

That would worry me.  The existing older buildings appear to be in good shape and I don't want to see more of the old streetscape bulldozed for another project that looks exactly like so many others of late.  I hope whatever goes in incorporates them instead.

The old gas station can go, but it would be a shame to see the building with Roots and the Hippie Hut bulldozed.

5 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

The old gas station can go, but it would be a shame to see the building with Roots and the Hippie Hut bulldozed.

 

 

The Ohio Exterminating building has been there since at least 1925, most likely before, and OE has been in the building since 1951.

The Hippie Hut building may be a lot older than it looks.  There are records with that address going back to at least 1890. 

Then there are the Clark Place rowhomes that also date back to the early 1900s as well. 

^That's a shame. The sterilization of High St. in the University District continues. 

4 hours ago, Pablo said:

^That's a shame. The sterilization of High St. in the University District continues. 

 

There must be a way to allow for growth but still keep a places character intact. Man I hate generic architecture. Especially so when century old buildings are destroyed in the process. 

 

15 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

So the Ohio Exterminator Co. wall sign made famous by Larry Flynt is going away then.

 

Seriously, how great is that Ohio Exterminating Co. sign

On 1/17/2019 at 4:58 PM, DevolsDance said:

Looks like a developer filed with the city engineering department for the review of a 234 unit apartment building at 1331 N High St.

The current use is Albans Auto Repair directly across from the south campus Kroger. The plot does extend all the way back to Wall St, but honestly thats a fairly small plot of land for that many units and parking as detailed in the application. Im fascinated to see what the height and massing will be when this gets announced. 

 

 

16 hours ago, cityscapes said:

Did some research... the project will take up all the parcels bound by Clark Pl, King Ave, N High, and N Wall except for the strip of row homes along Clark Pl. 

 

Can either one of you post a link or screenshot of any official city reviews or descriptions for this proposal?

 

If what DevoIsDance and cityscapes posted is correct, the project area for this 234 unit project is what is shown on the aerial below.  One would expect some type of University District Commission approval needed for this proposal.  And I haven't seen anything from our big three local development sources of the Dispatch, Business First, or CU about this project.  Even if UDC approval was not necessary (unlikely but just covering the bases here) a 234-unit apartment development in the N. High Street corridor between the Short North and OSU is a major project that the big three local media sources would have reported on.

 

49 minutes ago, Columbo said:

 

 

Can either one of you post a link or screenshot of any official city reviews or descriptions for this proposal?

 

If what DevoIsDance and cityscapes posted is correct, the project area for this 234 unit project is what is shown on the aerial below.  One would expect some type of University District Commission approval needed for this proposal.  And I haven't seen anything from our big three local development sources of the Dispatch, Business First, or CU about this project.  Even if UDC approval was not necessary (unlikely but just covering the bases here) a 234-unit apartment development in the N. High Street corridor between the Short North and OSU is a major project that the big three local media sources would have reported on.

 

 

The Columbus City Engineering and Zoning applications

 

https://ca.columbus.gov/ca/

Record# 19601-00014 

 

Thats where I found the basic information regarding the project and backed it up against the Franklin County Auditor parcel information for

scale of the land and the surrounding structures. 

15 minutes ago, DevolsDance said:

 

The Columbus City Engineering and Zoning applications

 

https://ca.columbus.gov/ca/

Record# 19601-00014 

 

Thats where I found the basic information regarding the project and backed it up against the Franklin County Auditor parcel information for

scale of the land and the surrounding structures. 

 

Thanks.  It is definitely there in the Engineering Search side as an "Engineering/Prelim Comm Site Plan" - and with absolutely no other info at the city review website(!)  This seems like a preliminary review of some type before it goes through zoning/building review and University District Commission review.  Which seems like "putting the cart before the horse" in terms of the review process because getting UDC approval seems like the first thing needed to set the parameters of the project.

 

Congrats on an outstanding catch from DevoIsDance and cityscapes on what might be a major (and potentially controversial) project at a prominent location.

8 hours ago, Columbo said:

 

Thanks.  It is definitely there in the Engineering Search side as an "Engineering/Prelim Comm Site Plan" - and with absolutely no other info at the city review website(!)  This seems like a preliminary review of some type before it goes through zoning/building review and University District Commission review.  Which seems like "putting the cart before the horse" in terms of the review process because getting UDC approval seems like the first thing needed to set the parameters of the project.

 

Congrats on an outstanding catch from DevoIsDance and cityscapes on what might be a major (and potentially controversial) project at a prominent location.

 

It's actually more common to have a preliminary review first rather than starting with the architectural or historic review boards. The preliminary review meetings get the applicant comments from zoning, storm water, public utilities, transportation, fire, parks & rec, etc that usually end up impacting the design of the site. It's better to start there and then refine the project as close to final form possible using the comments and then going before the various commissions for their design approval. 

^Yeah, the One Stop Shop review instructs each project which review board or commission they need to appear in front of if at all.

On 6/22/2016 at 2:16 PM, ColDayMan said:

250 New Apartments Could Be on Tap for Harrison West

 

More apartments could be coming soon to the western edge of Harrison West. Developer Michael Schiff of Schiff Property Group is in contract to buy the seven-acre Superior Beverage site at 871 Ingleside Street.

 

Schiff told Columbus Underground that he is working with Scott Pickett to acquire the parcel, which sits at the western edge of Buttles Avenue. Schiff and Pickett were also partners in Trotters Park, a 144-unit apartment complex built on 3.4 acres at the southeast corner of Buttles and Michigan Avenue.

 

More below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/250-new-apartments-could-be-on-tap-for-harrison-west-bw1

 

This Preferred Living project is really taking shape. It's easily seen from the on-ramp from Goodale to 315 north. There are 3 story buildings along Michigan and 4 story on the river side. Not the best looking apartments but certainly adds to the density of Harrison West.

 

Michigan Ave frontage:

 

Perry St. looking south:

 

Quality Pl looking southwest:

No pictures because none were worth taking but the trees have been cut and the pedestrian bridge at the Battelle site have been removed and there is some construction equipment on site. Seems like they're close to prepping for construction there. 

I also noticed last week that they had demolished the warehouse there that used to be along the northwest side of the site, just south of Fifth. 

On 3/19/2019 at 1:22 PM, Pablo said:

 

This Preferred Living project is really taking shape. It's easily seen from the on-ramp from Goodale to 315 north. There are 3 story buildings along Michigan and 4 story on the river side. Not the best looking apartments but certainly adds to the density of Harrison West.

 

Michigan Ave frontage:

 

Perry St. looking south:

 

Quality Pl looking southwest:

 

This residential project - apparently called "River House" - got included in one of the latest CU Construction Roundups - with photos posted on 3/22. According to the project's website - https://www.avenuepartners.com/river-house - the River House development will have 285 total units in two 4-story buildings (245 units) and two 3-story buildings (40 units).  Here are a couple more photos from https://www.columbusunderground.com/construction-roundup-short-north-university-district

 

?

 

Redevelopment Concepts Floated for King and High

 

 

A St. Louis (?)-based developer who wants to redevelop the southwest corner of King Avenue and North High Street presented several concepts for the site to the zoning committee of the University Area Commission last night.

 

Brandt Stiles of Collegiate Development Group (CDG) and architect Renato Gilberti, from the Chicago office of BKV Group, explained to the group that their first idea for the site was to tear down all the existing buildings and replace them with a seven-story, 215-unit apartment building with ground-floor retail.

 

They soon abandoned that approach, however, after they “discovered that some of the buildings were considered to be of historic importance,” said Renati.

 

The cluster of buildings that currently occupy the site include a two-story brick building on the corner (home to the Hippie Hut and Just Cause), a two-story building to the south that holds Ohio Exterminating, a small car lot, an auto repair shop, a five-unit row house on King, and several smaller buildings that have been added on to the larger ones over the years. Not included within the scope of the project is the row of renovated townhouses on Clark Street.

 

More below:

https://www.columbusunderground.com/redevelopment-concepts-floated-for-king-and-high-bw1

 

Need more detail than the sugar cubes seen so far

Yeah this does not seem that awful so far. They are going to preserve most of the corner(Hippie Hut)building and the front of the Exterminating building and what looks like divide it up into mostly two sections with one being 133 feet high. We have no idea of what these buildings will look like. If they are trying to increase density and also try and keep part of the streetscape intact, I really can't blame them for that. If we can't have density along High, then we might as well give up on the concept totally. 

 

It seems like they cannot win-they either don't think big enough, or they are destroying the character of the neighborhood. 

 

*it looks like this company does nothing but student living boxes near a large university campus-their projects are nothing but those.

Edited April 3, 20196 yr by Toddguy

I appreciate the attempt to go tall instead of tearing everything down. Hopefully they're able to make that plan work. 

12 minutes ago, 17thState said:

I appreciate the attempt to go tall instead of tearing everything down. Hopefully they're able to make that plan work. 

I bet the neighborhood will fight this like those others did that proposal behind High on Price. Maybe with the same result too, unfortunately.

On 3/21/2019 at 12:40 AM, 17thState said:

I also noticed last week that they had demolished the warehouse there that used to be along the northwest side of the site, just south of Fifth. 

7 hours ago, Toddguy said:

I bet the neighborhood will fight this like those others did that proposal behind High on Price. Maybe with the same result too, unfortunately.

 

This isn't that far away from that Uncommon place, which I felt at least somewhat added height to the area. Maybe they can try to squeeze a floor or two more out of the commission. Is the University Commission usually height-adverse? 

 

If it's just NIMBYs, I can try to go to the meeting and fight back with my YIMBY and argue that more density is needed to support the crazy amount of retail right there.

 

Also, Kroger's stupid parking lot is looking more and more out of place, lol

4 hours ago, Zyrokai said:

 

This isn't that far away from that Uncommon place, which I felt at least somewhat added height to the area. Maybe they can try to squeeze a floor or two more out of the commission. Is the University Commission usually height-adverse? 

 

If it's just NIMBYs, I can try to go to the meeting and fight back with my YIMBY and argue that more density is needed to support the crazy amount of retail right there.

 

Also, Kroger's stupid parking lot is looking more and more out of place, lol

 

It was not on High & Price this project would be along those lines.  Some projects just aren't right for the neighborhood and you should be ashamed of yourself if you go tell people what they need IF you're not a property owner in the neighborhood.  If you are then have at it, as you should.  I supported the revocation of the Price project because I wanted to support my neighbors as I knew they would support me.  And if you actually talk to them, you would understand that they are all for more development within reason.  But if you yourself are not actually invested in the neighborhood then respectfully keep your opinions out of those meetings.

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

It was not on High & Price this project would be along those lines.  Some projects just aren't right for the neighborhood and you should be ashamed of yourself if you go tell people what they need IF you're not a property owner in the neighborhood.  If you are then have at it, as you should.  I supported the revocation of the Price project because I wanted to support my neighbors as I knew they would support me.  And if you actually talk to them, you would understand that they are all for more development within reason.  But if you yourself are not actually invested in the neighborhood then respectfully keep your opinions out of those meetings.

 

While I hear what you're saying, many times the concerns brought up by neighborhood NIMBYs aren't always that reasonable.

 

I think the High & Price situation is the perfect example of NIMBYs losing their collective mind with little reasonable argument. While yes, residents should have a voice in development that happens around them, I just do not agree that if I am not a property owner that I cannot have an opinion. I would argue the killing of that project has indirectly impacted those who are not owners in the area and possibly hurt the neighborhood owners much more than that proposed development would have. You see, every project that is killed by NIMBY's adds to the housing shortage, a shortage inflates housing prices, inflated housing prices increase property value, and increasing property value increases what a developer must build to get a return on their investment. As a "non-owner", who's opinion you say shouldn't matter, let me explain why it should matter. As a renter, every "High and Price situation" is an increase in rent, it's lost density, it's lost transit focus, it's lost foot traffic for local retail and restaurant, it's lost affordable units, and it's lost time. Now, considering those things, I would say the NIMBYs have created a ripple that far surpasses their arguments of traffic and sunlight because it's not like this project is a one off, it is a constant we are seeing within these areas. 

 

Additionally, I would like to address how killing that project may actually have done local neighbors more harm than good in the long term. In areas like the SN, that property will be developed, however nothing guarantees the next proposal will address their concerns like Kaufman was trying to do. Example, Parkside on Pearl... Back in 2013, residents fought hard to keep that development from happening citing height concerns, the casting shadows on the park, density, and loss of parking. Wood Cos attempted to win over residents (much like Kaufman) by throwing in improvements to the park, shifting the massing towards High Street, lowering its height, and reducing units. Well it's now 7 years later and Wood has let other developers exhaust the residents with endless proposals and increasing density to the point that 2013 Parkside on Pearl seems mild in comparison. So now seven years later Parkside on Pearl is a taller, boxier, denser project with no park improvements. It's a great example because now, less than and decade later, neighbors are getting a larger development and less for the neighborhood value adds than if NIMBYs hadn't attempted to stall the inevitable. Mark my words, High & Price is the new Parkside on Pearl because in 5 years as housing pressures increase and new norms are set, a developer who cares a whole lot less than Kaufman will succeed at getting a project through that will make them wish they had allowed the Kaufman proposal to happen. See the thing is that saying "we support density, just not that density" isn't a solution, it's just being difficult and it will eventually lose. Instead of arguing density, traffic, and the sunlight, the residents should begin pushing for quality of materials and design because ultimately bigger projects will happen whether residents like it or not. 

 

So while I do see where you're coming from, you need to understand that there is a lot more to it then "You should be ashamed of yourself if you go tell people what they need IF you're not a property owner in the neighborhood" because it is not just adjacent owners who feel impacts of a development. So I would say instead of telling me and others to be ashamed, you should gain some perspective. 

Edited April 3, 20196 yr by tlb919

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

It was not on High & Price this project would be along those lines.  Some projects just aren't right for the neighborhood and you should be ashamed of yourself if you go tell people what they need IF you're not a property owner in the neighborhood.  If you are then have at it, as you should.  I supported the revocation of the Price project because I wanted to support my neighbors as I knew they would support me.  And if you actually talk to them, you would understand that they are all for more development within reason.  But if you yourself are not actually invested in the neighborhood then respectfully keep your opinions out of those meetings.

 

I live in Victorian Village, a mere block from here, am frequently at the stores and services here (Kroger, bars, the library) and basically consider this area to be my home as well, plus I have vested interest in the health of the city in which I live. We need more density projects and I will advocate for them every chance I get if it adds more housing. I don't want the character of a neighborhood ruined--ever--but there are many ways to prevent that while fulfilling the needs of the city. The person above me explained it perfectly. The High & Price project is such a huge loss for not only Victorian Village, but The Short North and surrounding neighborhoods as well. It would have fit Victorian Village perfectly and was, imo, quite beautiful. And I'm a VV official resident, if we want to get technical.

3 hours ago, tlb919 said:

 

So while I do see where you're coming from, you need to understand that there is a lot more to it then "You should be ashamed of yourself if you go tell people what they need IF you're not a property owner in the neighborhood" because it is not just adjacent owners who feel impacts of a development. So I would say instead of telling me and others to be ashamed, you should gain some perspective. 

 

I hear you as well and am all for density, however you're VERY incorrect when you say it was High & Price because it did not touch High in any way.  Price is a very narrow street and could not accommodate such a project, now you could argue Hubbard Park Place is in a similar situation but it just flat out is not.

 

There were several issues at play here and honestly I think any other developer would've worked a lot harder than Kaufman did to resolve them.  They wanted their piece de resistance and that was that, Hubbard Park Place is a prime example of fitting in without ruining the neighborhood.  The Price project would have completely transformed both of those blocks in the worst way possible.  And also outside of Gravity, go look at the quality of Kaufmans projects, would you want 80 on the Commons in your backyard?

 

I understand that this was some what of a missed opportunity and potentially to the economy of the area.  But don't act like this project alone would've reversed the course of the housing shortage because that's just ridiculous. The Price & 2nd project is on the developer; they could've done a much better job listening and compromising rather than pouting into a corner when they didn't get their way.

 

To get back on topic, the good thing about this project is it's not in a similar neighborhood at all. Although there are owners there, the renters far surpass their numbers.  However everyone better not complain when this thing looks like Uncommon and all of those original buildings have nothing wrong with them outside of the old gas station.

Edited April 3, 20196 yr by wpcc88

Price is literally 4 lanes across if you include parking.  The addition of even a few hundred residents wouldn’t have changed anything.  People don’t all leave from and arrive to their apartments all at once to create the kind of ridiculous trafficpocalypse the NIMBYs were suggesting.  And the project had parking, so that wasn’t a concern, either.  There’s a point where these people should have no further say in a development.  Delusions that a neighborhood should exist in a vacuum seal pack preserved in some arbitrarily chosen form should not be validated.

 

The Price project is just one example out of endless others that have been cancelled or seen reductions because of   the desire to accommodate every fundamentally dumb position on development and neighborhoods impacts.  The real impacts are a vanilla city that is rapidly losing the fight against affordability and the opportunity to see real transit options due to a lack of density. These impacts are snowballing across the city.  

 

I’ve lived in cities where buildings far larger that 80 on the Commons were in my backyard.  You know what happened?  Nothing, because I didn’t live in the fantasy that cities should look like Hilliard.  As such, there were no consequences at all.  If felt like a city.  BFD.  That’s why I lived there.  

Edited April 3, 20196 yr by jonoh81

People don't understand that Columbus isn't really much of a 9-5 city. That's one of the reasons our traffic is seldom out of hand. It takes a nasty accident or serious construction to actually snarl traffic.

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

Price is literally 4 lanes across if you include parking.  

 

Price is two lanes max! It's not happening and for good damn reason. Also literally nobody said they want SN to look like Hilliard, I hate that area to be honest. Like I said unless you're invested, you have zero room to complain to the commission and need to stay right here on this forum, especially if you don't live there. I was hardly worried about the traffic but more about the 15 story building that was a half block off High Street that would look like the death star. They could've went back to the drawing board and came up with a compromise but again they decided to publicly pout because they didn't get their way, too damn bad.

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

Price is two lanes max! It's not happening and for good damn reason. Also literally nobody said they want SN to look like Hilliard, I hate that area to be honest. Like I said unless you're invested, you have zero room to complain to the commission and need to stay right here on this forum, especially if you don't live there. I was hardly worried about the traffic but more about the 15 story building that was a half block off High Street that would look like the death star. They could've went back to the drawing board and came up with a compromise but again they decided to publicly pout because they didn't get their way, too damn bad.

People can care about areas they don’t live in, and they can advocate for better development across the city.  VV isn’t a private, gated community.  It’s an urban neighborhood in the city.  You can’t tell people to stay out of the commission meetings, especially when so much of the infrastructure improvements and tax incentives came from public dollars across the city, not just from VV.  And the meetings are open to all the public. AFAIK, Kauffman came back like a dozen times.  I sincerely hope a 20 story building goes there after people from across the city come out in favor at a meeting. Don’t like it?  Too damn bad.  The fact that you don’t live in or like Hilliard development, but promote it where you live suggests you like it just fine. 

Edited April 4, 20196 yr by jonoh81

3 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

Price is two lanes max!

 

Im seeing space for 3 cars... maybe 4 if you marked and organized the road properly. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9807624,-83.0049162,3a,26.1y,93.77h,84.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0TifvrePzQMfsVi-ueMBCg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

3 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

They could've went back to the drawing board and came up with a compromise but again they decided to publicly pout because they didn't get their way, too damn bad.

 

They did go back to the drawing board... multiple times... But the residents were worried about not being able to see the sun because apparently it sits in the same spot all day (which is news to me). Kaufman did the opposite of pout (which is what the residents did), being a local company that cares about its reputation, they decided to pack up their proposal and let some more confrontational developer take on the residents. As someone mentioned above, you'll likely see something as tall if not taller here and possibly a lot uglier. I hope its a 20+ stories personally. 

 

3 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

Like I said unless you're invested, you have zero room to complain to the commission

 

Wrong. If you pay taxes in city limits, you have a right to an opinion. Especially because people like you are the reason rent is getting so damn high here and hurting all of the people who struggle to pay their rent. By your logic, poor residents living in a less-invested area who are predominantly renters have no right to voice an opinion. That's ridiculous. 

 

 

As for the project at King and High, I hope they build a 20+ story tower with quality materials. 

 

Cities grow and change, get over it or move to Washington Courthouse.