1 hour ago, GCrites said:

 

What is the price range of the cars they sell? If it's mostly under $10-15K they are going to sell out often.

Yeah I've seen the lot barren many many times over the year, the lack of cars in the lot might not mean anything.

On 3/25/2024 at 8:44 AM, OH_Really said:

The expectation of parking just outside the door is ingrained unfortunately.  I actually drove from one business to another in the same shopping center, Graceland, until a non-American pointed out how crazy that is.  In fairness, shopping center parking lots are hostile to pedestrians though.  

I mean it's not that crazy. It's just shy of a quarter mile between them, which is walkable if you're grabbing a coffee and heading back to your car, much tougher if you're loaded down with groceries or if you if you walk there to shop, walk back with a cart, then walk the cart back, then walk back to your car now you're at a mile. I don't think you need to feel bad. 

 

Don't always trust the Europeans, they were shocked we were going to drive from Amsterdam to Rotterdam for a half day of meetings and back in a day, it's only like an hour between them. 

12 hours ago, 17thState said:

I mean it's not that crazy. It's just shy of a quarter mile between them, which is walkable if you're grabbing a coffee and heading back to your car, much tougher if you're loaded down with groceries or if you if you walk there to shop, walk back with a cart, then walk the cart back, then walk back to your car now you're at a mile. I don't think you need to feel bad. 

 

Don't always trust the Europeans, they were shocked we were going to drive from Amsterdam to Rotterdam for a half day of meetings and back in a day, it's only like an hour between them. 

Yeah and we can't forget to mention that walking in that environment, which is very much built for cars, is kinda unsafe especially if you have children with you. Pickup trucks these days my head barely goes above the front hood and I'm almost 6ft tall. How is a smaller person or a child going to be seen?

On 3/25/2024 at 9:19 AM, DTCL11 said:

That car place just replaced their sign recently so... who knows lol

The sign is gone now, so it seems they may be starting on the project soon. 

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

The sign is gone now, so it seems they may be starting on the project soon. 

Oh whoops, I forgot to come report on that lol. No cars have been in the lot all week and now the sign is gone. I have to imagine something is actually happening now.

I caught that yesterday too. Also took a peak inside, it's cleared out and plywood over one of the doors. 

 

 

The Weber & High project has been winding it's way through the building permit process. I found all the public documents easily through the City's development tracker page: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/39172d7e3b49461e80affb3e639dfc0b

 

1 minute ago, Pablo said:

The Weber & High project has been winding it's way through the building permit process. I found all the public documents easily through the City's development tracker page: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/39172d7e3b49461e80affb3e639dfc0b

 

I feel like that design is a bit different than what we saw before. I don’t think it’s anything super special, but I really hope this starts soon. 

On 6/21/2024 at 11:08 AM, VintageLife said:

I feel like that design is a bit different than what we saw before. I don’t think it’s anything super special, but I really hope this starts soon. 

Certainly won't make you stop and go "wow", but it at least won't make you stop and go "why is this crappy used car shack here at this prominent intersection?".

8 minutes ago, TIm said:

Certainly won't make you stop and go "wow", but it at least won't make you stop and go "why is this crappy used car shack here at this prominent intersection?".

I’m just happy it will actually have retail/restaurant space. Maybe some day I will be able to walk down high without feeling like I’m next to a highway. 

3 hours ago, VintageLife said:

I’m just happy it will actually have retail/restaurant space. Maybe some day I will be able to walk down high without feeling like I’m next to a highway. 

I don't mind walking down High at all, it really isn't that bad. What I do mind is trying to cross it though...

Something needs to be done about traffic calming on High. I hate being expected to tear ass while trying to locate and patronize businesses. So the current situation is even bad for cars. Nobody in their right mind should be using High to get across town.

10 minutes ago, GCrites said:

Something needs to be done about traffic calming on High. I hate being expected to tear ass while trying to locate and patronize businesses. So the current situation is even bad for cars. Nobody in their right mind should be using High to get across town.

Most definitely - If I'm driving 30-35 mph on High people are tailgating me and whipping around. The street is so wide that it seems natural to drive 45. Narrowing the lanes and bigger bump-outs at EVERY intersection would help would help. Something like what the City recently constructed at Summit and 7th.

3 minutes ago, Pablo said:

Most definitely - If I'm driving 30-35 mph on High people are tailgating me and whipping around. The street is so wide that it seems natural to drive 45. Narrowing the lanes and bigger bump-outs at EVERY intersection would help would help. Something like what the City recently constructed at Summit and 7th.

It needs to be narrowed down to two lanes, just like the short north. There is no reason people should use it as a main corridor for getting through town. It will never happen, because Clintonville residents would act like it would harm local businesses and change the neighborhood. 
 

There is a reason 23 shifted off high st at Morse. There is no reason for that highway to be there anymore. 

Edited July 1, 2024Jul 1 by VintageLife

Throw a rail line on High Street. That would take care of the width problem and encourage vehicles to use alternate routes (315, 71, Indianola, Summit, 4th, etc.). Put it underground once you get to Old North traveling south through Campus and the Short North due to the width of High Street through those areas. You could maybe bring it back to grade level through downtown, but it would be a tight squeeze. 

 

Obviously a pipe dream, but that would make High Street even more incredible than it already is. 

21 hours ago, VintageLife said:

It needs to be narrowed down to two lanes, just like the short north. There is no reason people should use it as a main corridor for getting through town. It will never happen, because Clintonville residents would act like it would harm local businesses and change the neighborhood. 
 

There is a reason 23 shifted off high st at Morse. There is no reason for that highway to be there anymore. 

It's not the residents who complain, it literally is the businesses. Studio 35 was a so outspoken against protected bike lanes because they might lose a few parking spots by their front door. I'm fairly certain the actual residents of this neighborhood are mostly on board with those types of changes. So many people walk and bike around here, they all want it to be better and don't want to be forced to stick to the side streets where it's actually nice and calm.

20 minutes ago, TIm said:

It's not the residents who complain, it literally is the businesses. Studio 35 was a so outspoken against protected bike lanes because they might lose a few parking spots by their front door. I'm fairly certain the actual residents of this neighborhood are mostly on board with those types of changes. So many people walk and bike around here, they all want it to be better and don't want to be forced to stick to the side streets where it's actually nice and calm.

These people need to start showing up to meetings and voicing those opinions then, because clintonville is far from what it could and should be. 

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

These people need to start showing up to meetings and voicing those opinions then, because clintonville is far from what it could and should be. 

I'm pretty sure they do. Unfortunately the decision makers don't hold the same opinions of the actual average resident of the neighborhood. I tried to get on the area review committee and it's very much a cliquey type club and not an actual productive organization. They aren't here to support the population of the neighborhood, they are there to protect the interests of a few minority stakeholders.

The Clintonville Area Commission passed a resolution late last year to the City to lower the speed limit on High to 25. This cannot be accomplished by signage only - there needs to be physical changes to the street since it's current design makes you feel you can drive 45. 

 

The CAC held a capital budget meeting in May to present the neighborhood's priorities to the City - #1 on the list was a High St. study. Whether or not the City considers this is not up to the CAC. I feel there's a general consensus among the commissioners that High St. needs work. 

https://www.clintonvilleareacommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/CAC-capital-budget-meeting-2024-minutes.pdf

 

I you're a masochist, you can watch all the commission meetings on their YouTube channel. 

6 minutes ago, Pablo said:

The Clintonville Area Commission passed a resolution late last year to the City to lower the speed limit on High to 25. This cannot be accomplished by signage only - there needs to be physical changes to the street since it's current design makes you feel you can drive 45. 

 

The CAC held a capital budget meeting in May to present the neighborhood's priorities to the City - #1 on the list was a High St. study. Whether or not the City considers this is not up to the CAC. I feel there's a general consensus among the commissioners that High St. needs work. 

https://www.clintonvilleareacommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/CAC-capital-budget-meeting-2024-minutes.pdf

 

I you're a masochist, you can watch all the commission meetings on their YouTube channel. 

That’s good to hear, it really should be 3 lanes, two traffic lanes and a turning lane with bump outs and parking, just like the short north. It would make clintonville so much better and make it a truly walkable neighborhood. 
 

With it being so wide in most areas, you could probably put a protected bike lane in as well. 

Edited July 2, 2024Jul 2 by VintageLife

4 hours ago, VintageLife said:

That’s good to hear, it really should be 3 lanes, two traffic lanes and a turning lane with bump outs and parking, just like the short north. It would make clintonville so much better and make it a truly walkable neighborhood. 
 

With it being so wide in most areas, you could probably put a protected bike lane in as well. 

Disagree it should be 3 lanes. You only have high street and Indianola as north/ south travel options between the Olentangy and 71. 

 

However, totally agree there should be some traffic calming measures. I think the section between Oakland Park and Dunedin Rd is a great example. Adds an island for pedestrians, adds some trees, and combined with narrow lanes, the islands and parked cars you naturally slow down, but still get the throughput of 4 lanes. They should add these to the sections of high street with commercial on both sides. You wouldn't need them continuously for people to slow down. 

On 7/2/2024 at 6:46 PM, 17thState said:

Disagree it should be 3 lanes. You only have high street and Indianola as north/ south travel options between the Olentangy and 71. 

 

However, totally agree there should be some traffic calming measures. I think the section between Oakland Park and Dunedin Rd is a great example. Adds an island for pedestrians, adds some trees, and combined with narrow lanes, the islands and parked cars you naturally slow down, but still get the throughput of 4 lanes. They should add these to the sections of high street with commercial on both sides. You wouldn't need them continuously for people to slow down. 

Yeah there is just WAY too much traffic in the area to really justify getting rid of lanes. There are like 30,000 residents in the neighborhood, it might be the most populated neighborhood in the entire city. North Linden might have it beat, it's kinda hard to find accurate neighborhood population statistics. Removing lanes would only make the traffic even worse and it's only getting more crowded. What we need is exactly what you said, more traffic calming and more spots for pedestrians to safely cross the street. There are a few sections of shops where it's like a 0.25 mile walk at least to get to a safe crossing so people just spring across 5 lanes of traffic all the time. 

 

And I know I've said it a ton here, but removing ALL street parking from High Street and reclaiming that for pedestrians is only better for literally everybody. Stops massive traffic backups from people trying to parallel park and gets the cars further away from the pedestrians and outdoor dining areas.

On 7/1/2024 at 1:10 PM, GCrites said:

Something needs to be done about traffic calming on High. I hate being expected to tear ass while trying to locate and patronize businesses. So the current situation is even bad for cars. Nobody in their right mind should be using High to get across town.

There's no reason High St should be higher than 25 MPH inside of 270. There have been pedestrian deaths all over High St due to cars driving recklessly, way too fast, or insufficient lighting at crosswalks. Clintonville is no exception. High St is the backbone of Columbus and should be treated as pedestrian friendly first. 

Making it harder to drive in the city is a good thing, IMO. It will encourage walking, biking and transit, and if fewer people drive, or drive more slowly, that means increased safety for everyone, including drivers themselves. And if we have fewer people in the city who want Columbus to be a suburban neighborhood, even better. 

2 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

Making it harder to drive in the city is a good thing, IMO. It will encourage walking, biking and transit, and if fewer people drive, or drive more slowly, that means increased safety for everyone, including drivers themselves. And if we have fewer people in the city who want Columbus to be a suburban neighborhood, even better. 

Exactly this, the main business corridor of clintonville should be a pain in the ass to drive through. It encourages public transportation and will make people actually use it and vote for it.  

1 hour ago, KyleofColumbus said:

There's no reason High St should be higher than 25 MPH inside of 270. There have been pedestrian deaths all over High St due to cars driving recklessly, way too fast, or insufficient lighting at crosswalks. Clintonville is no exception. High St is the backbone of Columbus and should be treated as pedestrian friendly first. 

Like you said, it's the backbone of Columbus. Possibly hundreds of thousands of people live off of High Street. They all kinda need to go places so making it even more of a pain for the residents to access where they live so visitors can have a nicer time isn't going to be received positively by the people actually living here. Yes the street needs to be safer and the area needs to be more pleasant for pedestrians, but you can't make the place a more difficult area to live in to satisfy those desires. There has to be a balance of safety and functionality.

20 minutes ago, TIm said:

Like you said, it's the backbone of Columbus. Possibly hundreds of thousands of people live off of High Street. They all kinda need to go places so making it even more of a pain for the residents to access where they live so visitors can have a nicer time isn't going to be received positively by the people actually living here. Yes the street needs to be safer and the area needs to be more pleasant for pedestrians, but you can't make the place a more difficult area to live in to satisfy those desires. There has to be a balance of safety and functionality.

If what you are saying is true, the short north would not be the busiest district in Columbus, with plenty of people wanting to move into the area. It wouldn’t be making the area better for visitors, it’s making it better for the people that live there, so they don’t have to drive all the time, and so they can enjoy walking and shopping at the local businesses. 

8 hours ago, VintageLife said:

If what you are saying is true, the short north would not be the busiest district in Columbus, with plenty of people wanting to move into the area. It wouldn’t be making the area better for visitors, it’s making it better for the people that live there, so they don’t have to drive all the time, and so they can enjoy walking and shopping at the local businesses. 

I think Tim and I do live there and we are telling you how as people who live there it could be improved, but taking high street down to 3 lanes when there aren't other options for travel (like Neil, 4th, Summit, etc in the Short North) would be a nightmare. The last time I drove through the short north every light was some jerk in a hellcat, ninja, or s**t box using the center lane to cut traffic, it was awful.  High Street should be slower, it should have pedestrian islands, but we live in the real world and not some urbanist dream where everyone rides their unicycle to work and has 4 local coffees and an ice cream on the way. We need to improve our infrastructure while still considering practical realities. 

20 hours ago, 17thState said:

I think Tim and I do live there and we are telling you how as people who live there it could be improved, but taking high street down to 3 lanes when there aren't other options for travel (like Neil, 4th, Summit, etc in the Short North) would be a nightmare. The last time I drove through the short north every light was some jerk in a hellcat, ninja, or s**t box using the center lane to cut traffic, it was awful.  High Street should be slower, it should have pedestrian islands, but we live in the real world and not some urbanist dream where everyone rides their unicycle to work and has 4 local coffees and an ice cream on the way. We need to improve our infrastructure while still considering practical realities. 

Cars will be a thing. For both people who live in the suburbs and commute to the city and for those in the city who travel on days with bad weather or hot/cold temperatures. I ride a bus around OSU. Some days, it works great. But there's times I'm waiting 10-15 minutes to get on, there's traffic/construction/EMS delays on the route, or I miss the bus by a minute and have to wait in the cold for another 10 to get on. Yes, having more public transportation would solve some of that, but I still enjoy having the liberty of going wherever I please, whenever I please, without it taking more than a few minutes to get there. I see value in both approaches, and more than anything support residents and visitors at least having viable options in however they choose to commute.

On 7/6/2024 at 7:45 PM, columbus17 said:

Cars will be a thing. For both people who live in the suburbs and commute to the city and for those in the city who travel on days with bad weather or hot/cold temperatures. I ride a bus around OSU. Some days, it works great. But there's times I'm waiting 10-15 minutes to get on, there's traffic/construction/EMS delays on the route, or I miss the bus by a minute and have to wait in the cold for another 10 to get on. Yes, having more public transportation would solve some of that, but I still enjoy having the liberty of going wherever I please, whenever I please, without it taking more than a few minutes to get there. I see value in both approaches, and more than anything support residents and visitors at least having viable options in however they choose to commute.

Exactly. We are one of the most car centric major cities in the entire country. We can't just remove infrastructure for the transportation method 98% of people are using here. It would be sooooo much easier to do that if we already had the public transit infrastructure, but most of the suggestions people are making here, while I agree with them and they are great, would not make sense for this city at this time because we are a SUPER car dependent population right now. Those are the types of changes you make when the other transportation options are already available to gently nudge some residents towards using it. Right now it would just aggressively shove everyone into longer commutes and more time sucking down exhaust fumes.

On 7/5/2024 at 2:37 PM, TIm said:

Like you said, it's the backbone of Columbus. Possibly hundreds of thousands of people live off of High Street. They all kinda need to go places so making it even more of a pain for the residents to access where they live so visitors can have a nicer time isn't going to be received positively by the people actually living here. Yes the street needs to be safer and the area needs to be more pleasant for pedestrians, but you can't make the place a more difficult area to live in to satisfy those desires. There has to be a balance of safety and functionality.

 

I love the comments we have back in forth, but we need statistics to show if our ideas are feasible. My comments are purely reactionary due to the unsafe driving I've seen on High St and the unfortunate deaths that have taken place due to High St being unsafe to cross. 

 

On High St, North of I-70 there's 2 highways to commute that are within a mile either East or West of the street (70 & 315). 

 

I don't have any statistics, but how far are people truly driving up and down High St? Having the interstate and Route 315 flank High St on both sides, would lowering the speed limit to 25 and adding pedestrian islands and safer crosswalks truly cause traffic delays and backups? Having additional places to park on High St cause people to shop elsewhere? Encouraging more store fronts and modes of transportation down High St encourage more folks to go to Easton or Polaris? 

 

The only pushback I have ever seen for lowering the speed limit and/or removing a lane is "more traffic". As of May, 2022, Columbus was rated the 6th best city for commuting, would slowing down High St put us in to a frenzy that will cause traffic delays that will destroy businesses down High St? 

20 minutes ago, KyleofColumbus said:

 

I love the comments we have back in forth, but we need statistics to show if our ideas are feasible. My comments are purely reactionary due to the unsafe driving I've seen on High St and the unfortunate deaths that have taken place due to High St being unsafe to cross. 

 

On High St, North of I-70 there's 2 highways to commute that are within a mile either East or West of the street (70 & 315). 

 

I don't have any statistics, but how far are people truly driving up and down High St? Having the interstate and Route 315 flank High St on both sides, would lowering the speed limit to 25 and adding pedestrian islands and safer crosswalks truly cause traffic delays and backups? Having additional places to park on High St cause people to shop elsewhere? Encouraging more store fronts and modes of transportation down High St encourage more folks to go to Easton or Polaris? 

 

The only pushback I have ever seen for lowering the speed limit and/or removing a lane is "more traffic". As of May, 2022, Columbus was rated the 6th best city for commuting, would slowing down High St put us in to a frenzy that will cause traffic delays that will destroy businesses down High St? 

High Street in the short north at 25, sure. High street in worthington at 25, sure. High street anywhere else north of downtown - 35. There’s just not enough development or to justify a slower speed limit. That being said, removing the central turn lanes with tree islands would greatly help with safety and beautification. Personally, I’d never travel from high street all the way up - there’s many other routes that are much faster than hitting stop light after stop light.

Remove all come-ons to mash the throttle and the numbers on the signs won't matter. There are places where speed limits have been lowered not because people asked but because routine traffic studies revealed the 80th percentile speed people were driving was below the speed limit because they felt unsafe going any faster.

4 hours ago, KyleofColumbus said:

 

I love the comments we have back in forth, but we need statistics to show if our ideas are feasible. My comments are purely reactionary due to the unsafe driving I've seen on High St and the unfortunate deaths that have taken place due to High St being unsafe to cross. 

 

On High St, North of I-70 there's 2 highways to commute that are within a mile either East or West of the street (70 & 315). 

 

I don't have any statistics, but how far are people truly driving up and down High St? Having the interstate and Route 315 flank High St on both sides, would lowering the speed limit to 25 and adding pedestrian islands and safer crosswalks truly cause traffic delays and backups? Having additional places to park on High St cause people to shop elsewhere? Encouraging more store fronts and modes of transportation down High St encourage more folks to go to Easton or Polaris? 

 

The only pushback I have ever seen for lowering the speed limit and/or removing a lane is "more traffic". As of May, 2022, Columbus was rated the 6th best city for commuting, would slowing down High St put us in to a frenzy that will cause traffic delays that will destroy businesses down High St? 

Statistics?! Noooo, just our own individual observations is all that matters here. Nothing else going on that we don't see!

 

So being in South Clintonville I can be downtown at the North Market in 12 minutes if I take either 315 or 71 South, or I can be there in 15-17 minutes if I just drive down High Street the entire way. I drive High Street from German Village to Worthington area fairly regularly (not the entire thing all at once, but I will use High to go to any of these places unless I need to be there ASAP since I literally never have to turn one time). People always get all "ohhh, the traffic lights!" about High Street but they cycle really fast and the road is rarely busy enough for you to hit multiple cycles anywhere. It's a fairly easy way to get north/south in the city plus there are things to look at and places to stop along the route. I call it "taking the scenic route" when I use High to get places haha.

 

EDIT: Plus one thing nice about Columbus, we do not seem to have that "stop in the middle of the intersection and block everyone because your light is green" thing going on. Never encountered that one time on High Street.

Edited July 8, 2024Jul 8 by TIm

I too live in S. Clintonville and commute from Downtown up High St. It's pretty smooth except in August and September when the students are back and haven't figured out how to get around yet.

 

I don't see a speed reduction as an issue. North of downtown High is 35 roughly between Arcadia and Old Worthington. Perhaps 25 south of Torrance would be a start. I think it's a question of transportation engineering vs urban planning. Do we want High to be a street that's welcoming to all modes of transportation (bikes, peds, cars, transit) of is it a stroad (I maintain that's what good portions are now). It is in the public realm and should be usable safely by all modes, not just cars. As stated above, changing the speed limit sign won't reduce speed on it's own, there needs to be physical changes.

 

17 minutes ago, Pablo said:

I too live in S. Clintonville and commute from Downtown up High St. It's pretty smooth except in August and September when the students are back and haven't figured out how to get around yet.

 

I don't see a speed reduction as an issue. North of downtown High is 35 roughly between Arcadia and Old Worthington. Perhaps 25 south of Torrance would be a start. I think it's a question of transportation engineering vs urban planning. Do we want High to be a street that's welcoming to all modes of transportation (bikes, peds, cars, transit) of is it a stroad (I maintain that's what good portions are now). It is in the public realm and should be usable safely by all modes, not just cars. As stated above, changing the speed limit sign won't reduce speed on it's own, there needs to be physical changes.

 

The bottom is good but the radii need to be larger on the left side. At least a 10’ minimum, preferably 20. We don’t want traffic going into the opposite land potentially causing collisions.

4 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

The bottom is good but the radii need to be larger on the left side. At least a 10’ minimum, preferably 20. We don’t want traffic going into the opposite land potentially causing collisions.

That's the point - to slow traffic. It's not a freeway off ramp. My biggest pet peeve is when I'm taking a slow right turn off of High some yahoo is riding me because I'm causing them a 2 second delay. Bigger radii encourage faster cornering which is a pedestrian safety issue.

4 hours ago, Pablo said:

That's the point - to slow traffic. It's not a freeway off ramp. My biggest pet peeve is when I'm taking a slow right turn off of High some yahoo is riding me because I'm causing them a 2 second delay. Bigger radii encourage faster cornering which is a pedestrian safety issue.

It won't slow it. It will either stop it or cause cars to go into other lanes. I work in site civil. I've designed aprons, intersections, and street connections. The only place a small radius is acceptable is for islands in parking lots. We have software that literally simulates a vehicle turning. Also, how does that street work when a vehicle larger than a car travels down it? I need a certain radius for a 40' box truck or bus to get through, and don't even get me started on a tractor with a 53' trailer. A lot more goes into this stuff than you think. I don't like wide sidewalks either, but there's reasons these things are designed the way they are, and that reason isn't for speed. Instead, let's do something more practical, like getting rid of deadly, impractical, and unsightly central turn lanes and convert them into landscaped islands with shade trees. 

5 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

It won't slow it. It will either stop it or cause cars to go into other lanes. I work in site civil. I've designed aprons, intersections, and street connections. The only place a small radius is acceptable is for islands in parking lots. We have software that literally simulates a vehicle turning. Also, how does that street work when a vehicle larger than a car travels down it? I need a certain radius for a 40' box truck or bus to get through, and don't even get me started on a tractor with a 53' trailer. A lot more goes into this stuff than you think. I don't like wide sidewalks either, but there's reasons these things are designed the way they are, and that reason isn't for speed. Instead, let's do something more practical, like getting rid of deadly, impractical, and unsightly central turn lanes and convert them into landscaped islands with shade trees. 

 

First of all, a semi doesn't belong on this street. You're not getting one down my South Clintonville street. UPS trucks have trouble. We have parking on both sides with two way traffic confined to a single center lane - a traffic engineer's nightmare. The corner radius on my street is 6'. Everything you described above has to do with moving traffic quickly, and very little about the urban, pedestrian experience. Walking in the Short North or Old Worthington is pleasant. One of the factors is slower traffic. 

 

I recommend this book. It doesn't bash civil or traffic engineers - they provide a valuable service. They just shouldn't lead the design of people focused places. 

 

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Pablo said:

 

First of all, a semi doesn't belong on this street. You're not getting one down my South Clintonville street. UPS trucks have trouble. We have parking on both sides with two way traffic confined to a single center lane - a traffic engineer's nightmare. The corner radius on my street is 6'. Everything you described above has to do with moving traffic quickly, and very little about the urban, pedestrian experience. Walking in the Short North or Old Worthington is pleasant. One of the factors is slower traffic. 

 

I recommend this book. It doesn't bash civil or traffic engineers - they provide a valuable service. They just shouldn't lead the design of people focused places. 

 

 

 

 

 

Any lane under 12' is foolish. I hate Long and Spring streets for that reason - everyone drives so close to each other and I've seen hundreds of mirrors get nearly clipped. I'm all for slower traffic in denser areas, but there's some things that are just common sense. Also, those streets may eventually be used as access for trash, event drop offs, or deliveries for restaurants and shops. A truck (maybe not tractor trailer but a truck) needs to be able to comfortably fit there. It also needs to be able to accommodate a snow plow, firetruck, and other road maintenance equipment.

12' is too wide for city streets - that's better for roads like Morse Rd. 10' to 11' is much better for slowing traffic - the City of Columbus has standardize lanes ranging from 10' to 13' depending on the design speed. Great streets and neighborhoods think less about traffic throughput and more about the safety and comfort of those living there.

 

 

Cars are maybe 6 feet wide besides outrageous SUVs.

12 hours ago, GCrites said:

Cars are maybe 6 feet wide besides outrageous SUVs.

Some humans also are pushing 6ft wide these days. We need wider sidewalks!

2 hours ago, TIm said:

Some humans also are pushing 6ft wide these days. We need wider sidewalks!

I’ve seen 4’ crazy enough!

Well, this could get interesting! I have been hoping something would fill that space for a long time. Hopefully they use the new zoning and don’t make some crappy 1 story. 
 

 

current location

2 hours ago, VintageLife said:

Well, this could get interesting! I have been hoping something would fill that space for a long time. Hopefully they use the new zoning and don’t make some crappy 1 story. 
 

 

current location

I've lived around the corner for over three years now and this parcel has been inactive the entire time. I don't even know if those buildings have ever even had an open business in them in that time, certainly no successful ones. Would be awesome to see this redeveloped and start finally upgrading High Street through the neighborhood.

5 hours ago, TIm said:

I've lived around the corner for over three years now and this parcel has been inactive the entire time. I don't even know if those buildings have ever even had an open business in them in that time, certainly no successful ones. Would be awesome to see this redeveloped and start finally upgrading High Street through the neighborhood.

I started going to high street dental before Covid when it was still in that spot. It moved and I don’t remember anything else going in. 

Edited January 22Jan 22 by VintageLife

16 hours ago, VintageLife said:

I started going to high street dental before Covid when it was still in that spot. It moved and I don’t remember anything else going in. 

Yeah I moved to Clintonville in 2021, did my Covid-time  over near Bethel road. Has been vacant since I've been here!

It's crazy to think Clintonville is against new development along High St with this area being walkable. My guess is complaints about "where are people going to park" as if people are unable to walk, bike, uber, or take a bus to these businesses.

2 minutes ago, KyleofColumbus said:

It's crazy to think Clintonville is against new development along High St with this area being walkable. My guess is complaints about "where are people going to park" as if people are unable to walk, bike, uber, or take a bus to these businesses.

It also will include a garage haha, but people complained about the N Broadway and High building that would have also had parking. With the new zoning I don’t think they can deny it anyway