1 hour ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Do you know why it's always off? It's a shame because it's such a cool feature when it's actually working.

 

Short answer, the pumps have failed numerous times.

 

Long answer, much like the previous fountain, the decision was made early on to locate the pumps below the fountain... The issue is that when the fountain was installed it was discovered that the weight and design was causing the pond to leak water so the city installed a rubber skirt/liner around the base of the fountain. The rubber liner has basically made it impossible to reach the pumps for maintenance reasons and keep them clean ultimately leading to multiple failures in the pumping system causing it to rarely be on. 

 

Good news, city council approved the funds to permanently fix the issue by relocating the pumps to the side of the pond (still hidden but easier to maintain and fix), but work on that wont begin until the fall when the pond can be drained. 

Edited September 10, 20195 yr by DevolsDance

2 minutes ago, DevolsDance said:

 

Short answer, the pumps have failed numerous times.

 

Long answer, much like the previous fountain, the decision was made early on to locate the pumps below the fountain... The issue is that when the fountain was installed it was discovered that the weight and design was causing the pond to loose water so the city installed a rubber skirt/liner around the base of the fountain. The rubber liner has basically made it impossible to reach the pumps for maintenance reasons and keep them clean ultimately leading to multiple failures in the pumping system causing it to rarely be on. 

 

Good news, city council approved the funds to permanently fix the issue by relocating the pumps to the side of the pond (still hidden but easier to maintain and fix), but work on that wont begin until the fall when the pond can be drained. 

 

That's great news! Thanks for the info.

11-story tower proposed for Westminster-Thurber in Victorian Village

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/09/11/11-story-tower-proposed-for-westminster-thurber-in.html?iana=hpmvp_colum_news_headline

 

I can't read the article because it's behind the paywall, but exciting news!

1 minute ago, cbussoccer said:

11-story tower proposed for Westminster-Thurber in Victorian Village

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/09/11/11-story-tower-proposed-for-westminster-thurber-in.html?iana=hpmvp_colum_news_headline

 

I can't read the article because it's behind the paywall, but exciting news!

 

Overview, hopefully without breaking any rules

 

- No renders available yet, but will follow the design of Goodale Landing (2016 tower project)

- Tower will be on Neil Ave between the two older towers

- Working with VVC already and adjusting to their input regarding setback

- Construction set to begin summer 2020

 

6 minutes ago, DevolsDance said:

 

Overview, hopefully without breaking any rules

 

- No renders available yet, but will follow the design of Goodale Landing (2016 tower project)

- Tower will be on Neil Ave between the two older towers

- Working with VVC already and adjusting to their input regarding setback

- Construction set to begin summer 2020

 

 

Thanks for the info! It looks like next year is getting busier and busier on the construction front.

Wow, that's awesome.

 

Now if only the old Giant Eagle could become something other than a liquor store. I can't stand that GE is holding it hostage.

 

In fact, that whole plaza has so much potential. So much wasted space. Could have an awesome mixed use project there.

1 hour ago, DevolsDance said:

 

Overview, hopefully without breaking any rules

 

- No renders available yet, but will follow the design of Goodale Landing (2016 tower project)

- Tower will be on Neil Ave between the two older towers

- Working with VVC already and adjusting to their input regarding setback

- Construction set to begin summer 2020

 

 

$40 million, 56 units, to be called Heritage Pointe.

^Name sounds like a subdivision in South Carolina outside PTL

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

^Name sounds like a subdivision in South Carolina outside PTL

 

This is the Westminster-Thurber retirement community were talking about.  It might be their target demographic(!)

 

BTW, here's the site plan for the Heritage Pointe project from the article: 

Nice to see more construction. One point of clarification: they are working with the Harrison West Society, not VVC. This site is not in Victorian Village.

24 minutes ago, Pablo said:

Nice to see more construction. One point of clarification: they are working with the Harrison West Society, not VVC. This site is not in Victorian Village.

 

That's correct.  The VV Historic District boundary is at Neil Avenue next to Westminster-Thurber.  Therefore, this project doesn't need to be approved by the VVC.

While the the article didn't have render, it does look like they have applied for the variances with the city and the packet has architectural drawings attached (yay public records). Anyway, looks like they are planning it to be 135' tall with a 5' setback (originally proposed 18') and the design is almost identical to the Goodale Landing tower.

 

Also note, a total height of 135' will make it the tallest of the 4 towers if completed per these plans. Enjoy. 

 

 

Edited September 11, 20195 yr by DevolsDance

Not going to lie but it is a bit frustrating that a private entity donated the fountain and not long after the city spends 150,000 to repair the pond from issues related to it, then a few years later another 330,000k. The city has spent almost half a million dollars as a result of this fountain. I feel as though there should be some responsibility put on the group that funded the initial installation. That's alot of money that can be put to good use for better park projects than elephants shooting water out of their noses. 

Well this is somewhat unexpected:

 

Airbnb hotel for Short North?

3 hours ago, Zyrokai said:

Well this is somewhat unexpected:

 

Airbnb hotel for Short North?

 

Moved this post about this Airbnb hotel project for 1100 Dennison Avenue to this Victorian Village thread.  Interesting little project.  Actually, not so little, because its a 15,000-square-foot, three-story building.  And despite being located in the Victorian Village section of the Short North - its definitely not a typical VV historic property.

 

This is a three-story former medical office building built in 1962.  According to the article, local Short North/VV/IV developer Schiff Capital Group has purchased the 15,000-square-foot, three-story building at 1100 Dennison Avenue in Victorian Village for $850,000 - and the firm plans to move its offices to the ground floor of the building, and then renovate the upstairs floors for residential use.  And by residential use, Michael Schiff is proposing 10 units, set up as an "Airbnb hotel," where the units are used full-time as short-term rentals.

 

Michael Schiff has an impressive development record in this area - including partnering with Wood Cos. on the $40 million Hubbard Park Place tower and the $40 million Lincoln building at 711 N. High Street a block away.  In addition, Schiff's company developed the Aston Place apartment building and later Aston Row and Starr Avenue townhome phases immediately south of this new 1100 Dennison Avenue building acquisition.

 

Below is a streetview and aerial view of 1100 Dennison Avenue from the article:

 

Walked by Goodale Park earlier today, looks like city crews have set up and are starting to drain the pond in prep for the new fountain pump project approved earlier this year. The park should finally have a consistent working and maintainable fountain for spring.  

 

I wasn't sure what thread this best fit so feel free to move if there is a more appropriate one. 

Edited December 10, 20195 yr by DevolsDance

Anyone know what's going on behind the old Cafe Apropos?

7 minutes ago, Zyrokai said:

Anyone know what's going on behind the old Cafe Apropos?

A brewery from Cleveland, Saucy Brew Works, is taking that space.  They're adding on for some of the brew operations I believe.

ohhh super interesting. Thanks!

Looks like High & Price is back! (I am personally excited about this) 

https://columbusohdev.app.box.com/s/jyh70gorodqxlp9c0s38me8grwuqacaa

Page 6 for those interested!

 

Kaufman has placed a conceptual review on the VVC docket for February commission meeting.

The project details

- 8-story mixed-use structure along 2nd Ave ; 5 floors residential above 2 floors of parking

- Eight 2-story townhomes along Price Ave

- 166 total units

- 8,000 sq/ft commercial space 

 

Additional note from Kaufman - "Exterior materials to transition from visually heavier materials for the base and eastern side of the site, to lighter, domestically oriented materials toward the top and western side of the site."

 

I does look like they have provided renders and a site plan but they are not attached to the VVC agenda. Anyone want to place bets on how long it will take the neighbors to grab their pitchforks and diagrams about sunlight and traffic?

Edited February 7, 20205 yr by DevolsDance

It amazes me that after the Joseph, the project behind axis (the name escapes me),  the grandview Mercantile site, and White Castle, that this project garners so much resistance, particularly how much attention to detail and uniqueness Kaufman offered for it compared to the other projects approved. 

Just now, DTCL11 said:

It amazes me that after the Joseph, the project behind axis (the name escapes me),  the grandview Mercantile site, and White Castle, that this project garners so much resistance, particularly how much attention to detail and uniqueness Kaufman offered for it compared to the other projects approved. 

 

NIMBY is never really all that rational.

2 minutes ago, DTCL11 said:

the project behind axis (the name escapes me)

 

What is going on with that? We haven't heard any updates for a while.

11 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

What is going on with that? We haven't heard any updates for a while.

The completed one behind axis. Not the one over axis. I havent heard anything about the axis project since the announcement. 

36 minutes ago, DevolsDance said:

Looks like High & Price is back! (I am personally excited about this) 

https://columbusohdev.app.box.com/s/jyh70gorodqxlp9c0s38me8grwuqacaa

Page 6 for those interested!

 

Kaufman has placed a conceptual review on the VVC docket for February commission meeting.

The project details

- 8-story mixed-use structure along 2nd Ave ; 5 floors residential above 2 floors of parking

- Eight 2-story townhomes along Price Ave

- 166 total units

- 8,000 sq/ft commercial space 

 

Additional note from Kaufman - "Exterior materials to transition from visually heavier materials for the base and eastern side of the site, to lighter, domestically oriented materials toward the top and western side of the site."

 

I does look like they have provided renders and a site plan but they are not attached to the VVC agenda. Anyone want to place bets on how long it will take the neighbors to grab their pitchforks and diagrams about sunlight and traffic?

So we lose 34 residential units and 35,000sqft of office. Thanks, NIMBYs!

56 minutes ago, DTCL11 said:

It amazes me that after the Joseph, the project behind axis (the name escapes me),  the grandview Mercantile site, and White Castle, that this project garners so much resistance, particularly how much attention to detail and uniqueness Kaufman offered for it compared to the other projects approved. 

 

"iT's NoT oN hIgH sTrEeT!!"

Seriously, though........this is the one that goes BEHIND the Local Bar plaza, right? How much life is left in that plaza now?

1 hour ago, DTCL11 said:

It amazes me that after the Joseph, the project behind axis (the name escapes me),  the grandview Mercantile site, and White Castle, that this project garners so much resistance, particularly how much attention to detail and uniqueness Kaufman offered for it compared to the other projects approved. 

 

The problem is Kaufman time and time again does not deliver on that attention to detail. Look at 600 Goodale and their projects in franklinton as examples.

33 minutes ago, Zyrokai said:

Seriously, though........this is the one that goes BEHIND the Local Bar plaza, right? How much life is left in that plaza now?

 

The plaza is owned by Wood Companies, so much like your “not on high street” comment you’re off base.

9 minutes ago, wpcc88 said:

 

The problem is Kaufman time and time again does not deliver on that attention to detail. Look at 600 Goodale and their projects in franklinton as examples.

 

This discussion was previously hashed out in another thread. No need to bring it back up here. This proposal is still among the best 'non copy and paste' we've seen in a while. The commission has ways of approving and guiding material that other commissions did not fully take advantage of. I think the city in general is going to learn the hard way the aestetic cost of allowing developers to use cheap panels. I don't believe that designs that other commissions reviewed and approved should be used against a clearly different project with a different feel if the commission still has ultimate say on materials. Hopefully the updated version is more in line with previous iterations. Kaufman is still taking alot of chances other developers have not yet done and helping bring the overall density of our core to much more appropriate levels. 

Edited February 7, 20205 yr by DTCL11

1 hour ago, wpcc88 said:

 

The problem is Kaufman time and time again does not deliver on that attention to detail. Look at 600 Goodale and their projects in franklinton as examples.

 

Yeah.... I'm thinking that the opposition was not based in the worry that Kauffman wouldn't do enough attention to detail.  As I recall, the arguments were basically:

-"My backyard will never see the sun again!!!"

-"What about muh parking!?"

-"This'll destroy Victorian Village's character!!!"

-"Change!!" *screams in hysterics*

Yeah, as I recall none of the arguments has anything to do with architectural quality or detail. I have long argued that architectural detail and quality is best use of the commissions, not height/massing, traffic, and parking. If the neighbors has rolled into the meetings demanding better quality materials and a breakdown of the project quality, I absolutely would have supported that but no, every person was there claiming "Price is already too narrow", and "They are trying to build a looming monstrosity will perpetually shade my life in darkness".  

 

I hope this go around focuses more on the details and less on the neighbors NIMBY complaints. Ultimately this site will be developed and a local developer will give much much more to maintain a good relationship than a national dev will. 

 

Additionally, Gravity is probably one of the better built projects that isn't Wood Cos, I'm not sure using that as an example is going to win you any debates about Kaufman. Either way, it's all subjective and from my perspective Kaufman has been steadily upping their game, I welcome them to the Short North. 

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

The plaza is owned by Wood Companies, so much like your “not on high street” comment you’re off base.

 

I mean the Kaufman development land that we're talking about is BEHIND the one owned by Woods, right? What I'm trying to say is that I think NIMBYs opposed this one more than the Grandview Mercantile site, White Castle site, etc. because the Kaufman land does not face or sit on High Street like the other two mentioned here. It's more "within" the neighborhood.

 

Please let me know if I'm vastly "off base" and missing something big here, but that's why I put that snarky comment about "it's not on High street". I truly think that's why it got 10x more pushback.

Edited February 7, 20205 yr by Zyrokai

4 hours ago, DevolsDance said:

Looks like High & Price is back! (I am personally excited about this) 

https://columbusohdev.app.box.com/s/jyh70gorodqxlp9c0s38me8grwuqacaa

Page 6 for those interested!

 

Kaufman has placed a conceptual review on the VVC docket for February commission meeting.

The project details

- 8-story mixed-use structure along 2nd Ave ; 5 floors residential above 2 floors of parking

- Eight 2-story townhomes along Price Ave

- 166 total units

- 8,000 sq/ft commercial space 

 

Additional note from Kaufman - "Exterior materials to transition from visually heavier materials for the base and eastern side of the site, to lighter, domestically oriented materials toward the top and western side of the site."

 

I does look like they have provided renders and a site plan but they are not attached to the VVC agenda. Anyone want to place bets on how long it will take the neighbors to grab their pitchforks and diagrams about sunlight and traffic?

Personally, I absolutely adored one of the first iterations of this project. Its a real shame the commission forgot that they lived in a booming urban neighborhood. 

 

^^^ It was gorgeous. Such a shame ?

21 hours ago, DevolsDance said:

Yeah, as I recall none of the arguments has anything to do with architectural quality or detail. I have long argued that architectural detail and quality is best use of the commissions, not height/massing, traffic, and parking. If the neighbors has rolled into the meetings demanding better quality materials and a breakdown of the project quality, I absolutely would have supported that but no, every person was there claiming "Price is already too narrow", and "They are trying to build a looming monstrosity will perpetually shade my life in darkness".  

 

I hope this go around focuses more on the details and less on the neighbors NIMBY complaints. Ultimately this site will be developed and a local developer will give much much more to maintain a good relationship than a national dev will. 

 

Additionally, Gravity is probably one of the better built projects that isn't Wood Cos, I'm not sure using that as an example is going to win you any debates about Kaufman. Either way, it's all subjective and from my perspective Kaufman has been steadily upping their game, I welcome them to the Short North. 

 

It was height/density for this particular project. I was vehemently opposed because of who was building it as well(mentioned in another response so I won’t rehash).

 

The main thing is that none of the neighbors were opposed to development itself. They were opposed to significant height looming over their homes, which I found to be an appropriate argument.

 

This development could and should be around 6 stories and will still have a major impact on the area. In fact most of them said that and were in favor of that. Kaufman was the one who ran away pouting because they didn’t get their way. However in terms of developers they’re still relatively new to the neighborhood and needed to act as such. Many of the homeowners on both streets had been there for decades. And AGAIN were/are not opposed to development.

 

I think Kaufman is now doing the right thing and all parties involved are going to come away happy. Which is the best possible outcome.

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

It was height/density for this particular project. I was vehemently opposed because of who was building it as well(mentioned in another response so I won’t rehash).

 

The main thing is that none of the neighbors were opposed to development itself. They were opposed to significant height looming over their homes, which I found to be an appropriate argument.

 

This development could and should be around 6 stories and will still have a major impact on the area. In fact most of them said that and were in favor of that. Kaufman was the one who ran away pouting because they didn’t get their way. However in terms of developers they’re still relatively new to the neighborhood and needed to act as such. Many of the homeowners on both streets had been there for decades. And AGAIN were/are not opposed to development.

 

I think Kaufman is now doing the right thing and all parties involved are going to come away happy. Which is the best possible outcome.

 

Question: Why is there an expectation that dense urban development shouldn’t be built in a dense urban neighborhood?   

This goes back to the general attitude that people think development should immediately stop once it reaches an arbitrary level.  If people really want that, they should live in suburban- or better yet, rural- areas where there would be far less pressure and popularity to build up.  11 stories right off the main corridor of a major city is not only common, it should be encouraged.  

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Question: Why is there an expectation that dense urban development shouldn’t be built in a dense urban neighborhood?   

This goes back to the general attitude that people think development should immediately stop once it reaches an arbitrary level.  If people really want that, they should live in suburban- or better yet, rural- areas where there would be far less pressure and popularity to build up.  11 stories right off the main corridor of a major city is not only common, it should be encouraged.  

 

Density was not the issue for many; the development will be dense regardless and for that everyone should be happy. 

1 hour ago, wpcc88 said:

 

Density was not the issue for many; the development will be dense regardless and for that everyone should be happy. 

 

Clearly it was, considering the main complaints were regarding parking/traffic and height. Height is often required for the higher number of residential units, especially in a  neighborhood like the Short North where there are few vacant lots.  Residential unit concentration equates to density.  Your objections specifically attack density and encourage lower housing availability and higher prices across the board.  If people don't want to live next to taller buildings, they shouldn't buy homes in the city literally a few blocks from Downtown.

Edited February 8, 20205 yr by jonoh81

5 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

And AGAIN were/are not opposed to development.

Preferring a parking lot over a new building is pretty anti development IMO.  Home values have exploded in these trendy areas because of the desire to be near the Short North.  So, I'm not sure what these homeowners are complaining about.  It seems that they liked how quiet it used to be and are now opposing development.  They need to realize that they live near downtown in one of the trendiest areas, possibly in the midwest.  If they don't like that, it's time to capitalize on their increased home value, sell, and move to a quiet suburb.

3 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Clearly it was, considering the main complaints were regarding parking/traffic and height. Height is often required for the higher number of residential units, especially in a  neighborhood like the Short North where there are few vacant lots.  Residential unit concentration equates to density.  Your objections specifically attack density and encourage lower housing availability and higher prices across the board.  If people don't want to live next to taller buildings, they shouldn't buy homes in the city literally a few blocks from Downtown.

 

We’re going to go round and round on this, as a property owner in the neighborhood(even though not on the street) I spoke out and won.

 

This ONE development was not going to solve the affordable housing problem in the city. To suggest that like you did is laughable. 

 

In the end Kaufman is developing the land and I hope they can pull it off better than their other work. Gravity & 600 Goodale look great but they cut corners as discussed in the Franklinton thread. You can’t cut corners in Short North and it go unnoticed.

 

I have spoken my peace, feel free to respond but nothing is changing.

7 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

Preferring a parking lot over a new building is pretty anti development IMO.  Home values have exploded in these trendy areas because of the desire to be near the Short North.  So, I'm not sure what these homeowners are complaining about.  It seems that they liked how quiet it used to be and are now opposing development.  They need to realize that they live near downtown in one of the trendiest areas, possibly in the midwest.  If they don't like that, it's time to capitalize on their increased home value, sell, and move to a quiet suburb.

 

I don’t think I spoke to a single person that was opposed to the lot being redeveloped. Literally not a single one, not one of them called for single family homes to be built versus an apartment block. So you’re off base with your response.

16 minutes ago, wpcc88 said:

 

We’re going to go round and round on this, as a property owner in the neighborhood(even though not on the street) I spoke out and won.

 

This ONE development was not going to solve the affordable housing problem in the city. To suggest that like you did is laughable. 

 

In the end Kaufman is developing the land and I hope they can pull it off better than their other work. Gravity & 600 Goodale look great but they cut corners as discussed in the Franklinton thread. You can’t cut corners in Short North and it go unnoticed.

 

I have spoken my peace, feel free to respond but nothing is changing.

 

Straw man. I never said this one development would solve the problem.  These attitudes, however, are widespread, and they block or water down tons of projects across the city, which collectively does contribute directly to housing shortages and higher costs.  Your claim that this was anything but irrational NIMBYism is silly.  No one buys that.  You live in the city.  Either accept city development or move.  This is exactly why I advocate for heavy zoning changes throughout the city, so things like outdated variance requirements can't be used to shut down projects like this.

2 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Straw man. I never said this one development would solve the problem.  These attitudes, however, are widespread, and they block or water down tons of projects across the city, which collectively does contribute directly to housing shortages and higher costs.  Your claim that this was anything but irrational NIMBYism is silly.  No one buys that.  You live in the city.  Either accept city development or move.  This is exactly why I advocate for heavy zoning changes throughout the city, so things like outdated variance requirements can't be used to shut down projects like this.

 

I’m really curious as to where most live that were in favor. Prime example is the comments on these type of announcements on Facebook via CU or other media outlets. Most of the people opposed to development live in Newark or Dublin and truly don’t get what you’re saying. 

 

Trust me I get it, this is literally one of two(3 if you count the Lane Ave Gateway project) that I’ve ever been opposed to in 13 years of living in Columbus(all but 4 of those in SN/VV/IV). I also get the housing issues, but these aren’t going to be “affordable” which is the overlying problem. Subtracting 34 units is also not going to change anything in the grand scheme of things.

 

I too fight to make our city better, but I also want to do that within reason. I stood up for my neighbors as I would hope they would for me. I didn’t believe the project was appropriate, I cited examples of the developers good and bad qualities, ultimately it was shelved in favor of this new plan. I think some neighbors didn’t act right and I think the same of Kaufman. I just really hope they make this their best project yet or they’ll be blocked out again.

1 hour ago, wpcc88 said:

Subtracting 34 units is also not going to change anything in the grand scheme of things.

You're really having a tough time comprehending this, so I'll try to help you out a bit.  34 units is not a significant amount, no.  But 34 X 10 is 340.  Keeping up?  34 X 100 is 3400.  If we continue to let NIMBYs like yourself cause every development to be reduced, it will add up very quickly.  For how close you are to downtown in our main entertainment area near the Convention Center and Arena District, this is unacceptable.  You say you understand, but then make arguments that any suburban person would make.  You own a home near downtown in a city that was historically pretty quiet.  That is quickly changing and you are being left behind.  It's time for you to accept that change or move to an area that you are more comfortable with.

2 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

I spoke out and won.

Honestly, sometimes I think this is really what it's about for NIMBYs.  They get a little bit of a high from it.  It makes them feel overly important or something.

15 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

You're really having a tough time comprehending this, so I'll try to help you out a bit.  34 units is not a significant amount, no.  But 34 X 10 is 340.  Keeping up?  34 X 100 is 3400.  

 

Sweet math bro. 

 

Wpcc88 is entitled to his own opinion, particularly, since it's his neighborhood. No need to force him out of his house, because you got a hard on for some renderings.  

17 hours ago, wpcc88 said:

 

I’m really curious as to where most live that were in favor. Prime example is the comments on these type of announcements on Facebook via CU or other media outlets. Most of the people opposed to development live in Newark or Dublin and truly don’t get what you’re saying. 

 

 

Victorian Village, off of Park and Lundy.

 

Okay, so now that meet your qualifications I get to have an opinion on VV projects. As a VV resident I was absolutely in favor of this project for an array of reasons, most importantly density and land use. I remember moving here in the battle over the Hubbard Park Place project, there were screams of sunlight (even diagrams), traffic, density, architectural character, and the general belief that it would tarnish the neighborhood... none of the concerns have manifested. For me, the issue with how Price/2nd & High went down was not a density complaint or a traffic complaint, it was the full onslaught by neighbors to dig up any shred of reasoning they could to take it down. I recall the early renditions were received more favorable but still garnered pushback, mostly in the form of traffic (Price being considered too narrow) and massing. Kaufman reworked the project again and again. As the project went through changes it became obvious what had to happen, the density has to be focused on the High St side of the property and the residents wanted a transition, the problem with that is ROI... a developer often has target ROI they need to achieve to consider a project viable for financing to happen. ROI in this case translated to units, to get more units they had to go up and thats when all hell seemed to break loose ultimately killing the project. In my eyes, neighbors and the commission kind of caused the problem. Leading me back to square one... why is Hubbard Park Place successful and not a disaster for the neighborhood? Quality... the thing the anti-2nd/Price & High group never brought up.

 

Ultimately, you do have a right to have opinions on projects and they're valid. In that same jest though, so do the people on this board. My guess is most people on here aren't suburbanites trying to sway urban development, they're urban core residents who have a committed interest in it's future (density, transit, character, and growth), like myself. I recall you having quite a strong opinion on the Gravity II townhomes patios and the wood structure being exposed... should your opinion not matter there because you're not a Franklinton resident? I'll say it should be valid because you still live in the core and have an interest in its future... and that's why many of us care about the 2nd/Price & High project. 

 

 

3 hours ago, 17thState said:

Wpcc88 is entitled to his own opinion

As am I.

 

3 hours ago, 17thState said:

since it's his neighborhood.

I also live in the neighborhood.

Drumroll... The 2nd/Price & High renders have arrived.

 

 

 

 

More info at https://www.columbusunderground.com/new-plan-for-ibew-site-heading-to-victorian-village-commission-bw1

 

Looks like we may have Columbus' second spite project everyone. Honestly, I think Kaufman may be pulling a King & High on the commission but this is the lower density they demanded. Oh man, I'm going to go grab some popcorn. 

Edited February 10, 20205 yr by DevolsDance