October 5, 20231 yr 11 hours ago, ColDayMan said: Yeah, I knew that one. I meant to clarify to the west of that looks like more mobile homes. I think they're just small-footprint single family homes with detached rear garages.
October 5, 20231 yr On 10/3/2023 at 4:16 PM, ColDayMan said: Per that article: *GASPS* That's them saying that they are "with it" in that they are down with both discretionary spending (malls) and basic essentials (the DGs).
October 12, 20231 yr 14 hours ago, CbusOrBust said: Mt Carmel Dublin Does anyone know what the construction approach is here with the black panels? I've never seen that before. It looks like a sheathing and/or insulation with fluid applied air barrier on it, but I don't know why it's only being applied for certain extents like that instead of the full height...
October 12, 20231 yr 3 minutes ago, PizzaScissors said: Does anyone know what the construction approach is here with the black panels? I've never seen that before. It looks like a sheathing and/or insulation with fluid applied air barrier on it, but I don't know why it's only being applied for certain extents like that instead of the full height...
October 16, 20231 yr Proposed Dublin Development Around Mobile Home Park Gets First Review A proposal from Columbus-based developer Casto to build a significant development at the southwest corner of Avery and Rings Roads had its first review by Dublin’s Planning and Zoning Commission last week. The proposal calls for a mix of townhomes, apartments, single family homes, and an area of “mixed-use commercial” that could potentially incorporate retail and office space with apartments on the upper floors. What makes the project unique is the 24-acre Ponderosa Mobile Home Park, which currently sits in the middle of the proposed development’s footprint. Casto’s proposal calls for keeping the 55-and-older community, incorporating it into the larger development. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/proposed-dublin-development-around-mobile-home-park-gets-first-review-bw1/ "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
November 1, 20231 yr Pulte Homes' new Towns on the Parkway development in Dublin to include 154 townhome units The full scope of the Towns on the Parkway development in Dublin's Bridge Street District includes 154 townhome units, city documents show. In March, Columbus Business First reported on a 49-unit section of the development, which was to be built on 3.4 acres. But new drawings submitted to the city by the project's developer, Pulte Homes, shows a total of four lots measuring a combined 8.7 acres. The site is bounded by John Shields Parkway, Tuller Road and Village Parkway, and is east of a multifamily development called Tuller Flats. The townhomes will measure between 2,142 square feet and 2,545 square feet, according to the Pulte Homes website. The three- and four-bedroom units come with a two-car garage. Pricing for the townhomes start in the mid-$500,000s. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/11/01/pulte-homes-towns-on-the-parkway-dublin.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
November 5, 20231 yr 34 minutes ago, columbus17 said: DISAPPROVED https://dublinohiousa.gov/PZC/23-049/ Annoying, did they give reasoning why it was not approved?
November 5, 20231 yr 4 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Annoying, did they give reasoning why it was not approved? None that I could find. I don't know where their meeting minutes are located - let me look.
November 5, 20231 yr 8 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Annoying, did they give reasoning why it was not approved? https://dublinoh.new.swagit.com/videos/267494 2:19 in is when it starts.
November 6, 20231 yr So I somehow listened to all 2 hours of this and it was wayyy more interesting than expected and a little contentious in the polite we're all being formal way. But essentially the plan meets code. They even had to pull in the Dublin lawyer (he got pulled in a few times actually) to say that that they couldn't vote no because of parking since it was compliant with the code requirements. One board member repeatedly brought up that there wasn't enough parking for every apartment to have 2 cars. They also brought up the density and that it was too dense, but it also meets the code limits of 4.5 stories. They debated the greenspace requirements and the use of the AEP easement to meet the greenspace requirement. To be clear the development meets the greenspace requirement, but "what if AEP in 10 years decides to fill their easement with giant transformers, then it wouldn't meet the requirements". Personally, I guess there's some validity to this but seems kinda silly, I would imagine that nearly all AEPs easements just are for lines and I don't think a power pole takes away from something being greenspace. But anyway, I think it ultimately came down to the commission wanting to see a full master plan and how this site fits into the larger redevelopment plan. Which seems fair, but the developer pushed back saying he was being penalized for owning more land and that this development met code. I guess it met all objective code criteria, one of the requirements is to be "distinctly Dublin" whatever that means. Development team seem pissed and very frustrated.
November 6, 20231 yr I should add I think Dublin has done a lot well, particularly with Bridge Park, and I was surprised to hear all the pushback on this development's density. Also, seems like a bit of legal CYA to have a completely subjective requirement on top of your form based code. So you can still deny whatever project you want because it isn't "Dublin" enough. Think a project doesn't have enough parking, even though it does per your code, then just deny it because of whatever subjective BS you want.
November 6, 20231 yr 2 minutes ago, 17thState said: I should add I think Dublin has done a lot well, particularly with Bridge Park, and I was surprised to hear all the pushback on this development's density. Also, seems like a bit of legal CYA to have a completely subjective requirement on top of your form based code. So you can still deny whatever project you want because it isn't "Dublin" enough. Think a project doesn't have enough parking, even though it does per your code, then just deny it because of whatever subjective BS you want. I would just take it to court, seems it would be a pretty easy win
November 6, 20231 yr 11 minutes ago, 17thState said: So I somehow listened to all 2 hours of this and it was wayyy more interesting than expected and a little contentious in the polite we're all being formal way. But essentially the plan meets code. They even had to pull in the Dublin lawyer (he got pulled in a few times actually) to say that that they couldn't vote no because of parking since it was compliant with the code requirements. One board member repeatedly brought up that there wasn't enough parking for every apartment to have 2 cars. They also brought up the density and that it was too dense, but it also meets the code limits of 4.5 stories. They debated the greenspace requirements and the use of the AEP easement to meet the greenspace requirement. To be clear the development meets the greenspace requirement, but "what if AEP in 10 years decides to fill their easement with giant transformers, then it wouldn't meet the requirements". Personally, I guess there's some validity to this but seems kinda silly, I would imagine that nearly all AEPs easements just are for lines and I don't think a power pole takes away from something being greenspace. But anyway, I think it ultimately came down to the commission wanting to see a full master plan and how this site fits into the larger redevelopment plan. Which seems fair, but the developer pushed back saying he was being penalized for owning more land and that this development met code. I guess it met all objective code criteria, one of the requirements is to be "distinctly Dublin" whatever that means. Development team seem pissed and very frustrated. The density thing shocked me. They were also mad about the original height (6-7) stories, which baffles me.
November 6, 20231 yr 2 minutes ago, columbus17 said: The density thing shocked me. They were also mad about the original height (6-7) stories, which baffles me. Yeah agreed, I thought the whole point of the Bridge Street District was that it is the designated area for density in Dublin. Like everything else can be SFH and office parks, but this area is for people who want to be in Dublin but can only afford to/want to rent. One of the commissioners also made an off-hand comment about how expensive rents were. Like do you not understand you're actively perpetuating that problem by voting down density and wanting more parking, greenspace, etc.
November 6, 20231 yr 10 minutes ago, VintageLife said: I would just take it to court, seems it would be a pretty easy win I imagine this is the next step. When it seemed clear things were going sideways one of the members of the development team told an anecdote about how he was involved in trying to raise a sign. I guess the code height limit is 8 ft and the sign was at 4 ft, but became less visible because of a road project so when they went to raise it to the code height it was denied and a commissioner said "in Dublin we expect you to go above and beyond the code" Then he mentioned how they easily one the court appeal and were able to raise the sign.
November 6, 20231 yr 7 minutes ago, 17thState said: I imagine this is the next step. When it seemed clear things were going sideways one of the members of the development team told an anecdote about how he was involved in trying to raise a sign. I guess the code height limit is 8 ft and the sign was at 4 ft, but became less visible because of a road project so when they went to raise it to the code height it was denied and a commissioner said "in Dublin we expect you to go above and beyond the code" Then he mentioned how they easily one the court appeal and were able to raise the sign. Also, if they have a problem and think there won’t be enough parking, maybe the city should chip in and build a parking garage.
November 6, 20231 yr 25 minutes ago, Pablo said: Dublin is known to move the goal posts regularly. See also Worthington.
November 30, 20231 yr 43 minutes ago, columbus17 said: Looks like they're widing Bright Road and Sawmill Rd. Oh, cause another lane will help!! This will do nothing
November 30, 20231 yr Crawford Hoying proposes new mixed-use development in Dublin Crawford Hoying wants to build a new mixed-use development in the heart of Dublin. The developer submitted drawings to the Dublin Planning & Zoning Commission for a project described in city documents as the "Monterey Drive Development." Plans call for a mix of residential, commercial and office uses on a 6.9-acre site in the Bridge Street District's Historic Transition Neighborhood. Located on both sides of Monterey Drive and south of the West Bridge Street intersection, the land appears to be vacant except for a Shell gas station on the northwest side of the property. It abuts Dublin Cemetery to the east and Monterey Park to the south. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/11/29/crawford-hoying-monterey-drive-development-dublin.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
November 30, 20231 yr 55 minutes ago, ColDayMan said: Crawford Hoying proposes new mixed-use development in Dublin Crawford Hoying wants to build a new mixed-use development in the heart of Dublin. The developer submitted drawings to the Dublin Planning & Zoning Commission for a project described in city documents as the "Monterey Drive Development." Plans call for a mix of residential, commercial and office uses on a 6.9-acre site in the Bridge Street District's Historic Transition Neighborhood. Located on both sides of Monterey Drive and south of the West Bridge Street intersection, the land appears to be vacant except for a Shell gas station on the northwest side of the property. It abuts Dublin Cemetery to the east and Monterey Park to the south. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/11/29/crawford-hoying-monterey-drive-development-dublin.html Not taking the front building all the way to the property line, is certainly a choice. Edited November 30, 20231 yr by VintageLife
November 30, 20231 yr 6 minutes ago, ColDayMan said: Crawford Hoying proposes new mixed-use development in Dublin Crawford Hoying wants to build a new mixed-use development in the heart of Dublin. The developer submitted drawings to the Dublin Planning & Zoning Commission for a project described in city documents as the "Monterey Drive Development." Plans call for a mix of residential, commercial and office uses on a 6.9-acre site in the Bridge Street District's Historic Transition Neighborhood. Located on both sides of Monterey Drive and south of the West Bridge Street intersection, the land appears to be vacant except for a Shell gas station on the northwest side of the property. It abuts Dublin Cemetery to the east and Monterey Park to the south. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/11/29/crawford-hoying-monterey-drive-development-dublin.html I saw this. Not a huge fan - as long as the cemetery doesn't expand the actual cemetery into the green space it's not too terrible, but there's a lot of nice mature trees that will be lost.
November 30, 20231 yr 13 hours ago, VintageLife said: Not taking the front building all the way to the property line, is certainly a choice. Which side of the property are you referring to? The Bridge Street side is on the property line FWIW
November 30, 20231 yr 14 hours ago, columbus17 said: Looks like they're widing Bright Road and Sawmill Rd. It looks like the sidewalk is built to shared-use path standards so I bet they will be spinning this as a big accomplishment for transportation alternatives, safety, access etc.
November 30, 20231 yr 9 minutes ago, Dev said: Which side of the property are you referring to? The Bridge Street side is on the property line FWIW The bridge st side, they don’t own the little parcel that has 4 trees on it?
November 30, 20231 yr 23 minutes ago, VintageLife said: The bridge st side, they don’t own the little parcel that has 4 trees on it? Oh this guy? Yeah that's part of their parcel. It looks pretty weird now that you mention it. I can't un-see it!
November 30, 20231 yr 53 minutes ago, Dev said: Oh this guy? Yeah that's part of their parcel. It looks pretty weird now that you mention it. I can't un-see it! Yeah, it makes zero sense. It’s like they kept it so people know there is parking behind or something.
November 30, 20231 yr Maybe it's for a potential patio space? It is odd, almost looks like it's just a leftover from the fact the left building is a copy-paste of the right building Edited November 30, 20231 yr by NW24HX
December 13, 20231 yr Well well well, what do we have here? I'd say somthing BIG is going on this corner! Planning staff made a mistake - say goodbye to the Marathon? https://dublinohiousa.gov/art/23-120/
December 13, 20231 yr Been aware of this vaguely - nice to see its finally moving forward. https://dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/23-123/
December 13, 20231 yr 3 hours ago, columbus17 said: Well well well, what do we have here? I'd say somthing BIG is going on this corner! Planning staff made a mistake - say goodbye to the Marathon? https://dublinohiousa.gov/art/23-120/ Wait, is that an actual midrise building behidn this restaurant or is that just for show?!?! "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
December 13, 20231 yr I'm confused, the address listed on that link is 6584 Riverside Drive and it references the existing ZCucina at Bridge Park location which looks exactly like the rendering. Are you just inferring that something is happening at the Marathon because they accidentally included that parcel in the ZCucina canopy request?
December 13, 20231 yr 9 minutes ago, 17thState said: I'm confused, the address listed on that link is 6584 Riverside Drive and it references the existing ZCucina at Bridge Park location which looks exactly like the rendering. Are you just inferring that something is happening at the Marathon because they accidentally included that parcel in the ZCucina canopy request? Yeah that's weird. I wonder if something is planned for that parcel and it's just a oopsie they put it here. It's funny, just a couple months ago I needed gas and drove by these two stations. You can hardly tell they're open. Very rough and out of place here. I just assumed then that someone would buy them both and open up a large station on both parcels like a Sheetz. Pleasantly surprised by the first proposal. We'll see if anything is actually proposed for the Marathon parcel.
December 13, 20231 yr 43 minutes ago, aderwent said: Pleasantly surprised by the first proposal. I don't want anyone to get their hopes up, but that building already exists. They're just redoing the outside canopy/patio
December 13, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, 17thState said: I don't want anyone to get their hopes up, but that building already exists. They're just redoing the outside canopy/patio I'm aware. The first proposal being the Shell station site from last month. "We'll see if anything is actually proposed for the Marathon parcel." Edited December 13, 20231 yr by aderwent
December 13, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, aderwent said: I'm aware. The first proposal being the Shell station site from last month. "We'll see if anything is actually proposed for the Marathon parcel." If they are doing something with the marathon parcel that could explain why they left the corner empty on the other proposal. Maybe it’s a combined piece of the project.
December 13, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, VintageLife said: If they are doing something with the marathon parcel that could explain why they left the corner empty on the other proposal. Maybe it’s a combined piece of the project. That's what I'm gathering. They did mark the wrong site but someone had to have manually gone in and made that image of the Marathon with the site label. Something is planned for there and I'd say its big and dense. Makes sense given how the redid (and widened) the bridge across the street - which should connect to that other development off of High. Btw, whatever happened to the high rise off 270 and the new bridge park phases? A ton of Dublin projects in that area have just gone silent.
December 16, 20231 yr Guess who's back (for what feels like the 1,000ndth time)... https://dublinohiousa.gov/alpha/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Drawings-1.pdf
December 16, 20231 yr And Matt Davis the genius developer does it again! Seriously - he does great work! https://dublinohiousa.gov/alpha/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Drawings-2.pdf
December 20, 20231 yr New concept plan shows how Dublin's Riverview Village project will be developed A new concept plan for Riverview Village reveals how the Dublin project could be developed. The team behind the mixed-use project, which is led by Cohatch CEO Matt Davis, submitted a conceptual review to the city showing the uses and location of each building. While the bulk of the project is similar to the plan previously filed with the city, the most notable change is what Davis described as the "face" of Riverview Village. The area serving as the main entryway into the village will be a public plaza for arts and craft fairs, makers markets, startup pitch competitions, entertainment and other events. Anchoring the plaza will be a meeting and event venue constructed on the site of a historic home that will be demolished. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/12/19/cohatch-riverview-village-dublin-new-concept-plan.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 2, 20241 yr New single-family housing development with 153 units proposed on 100-acre Dublin site A new residential development has been proposed for a 100-acre property in Dublin. Called the Farms at Cosgray, the project includes 153 units that would be constructed at 5713 Cosgray Road on the city's west side. The rural site is between Jerome and Washington townships, and is bisected by an existing railroad track near the Cosgray Road and Barronsmore Way intersection. It is also abutted by Ballantrae, a subdivision located to the east of the development. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/01/02/housing-development-dublin-cosgray-ballantrae.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 3, 20241 yr 6 hours ago, ColDayMan said: New single-family housing development with 153 units proposed on 100-acre Dublin site A new residential development has been proposed for a 100-acre property in Dublin. Called the Farms at Cosgray, the project includes 153 units that would be constructed at 5713 Cosgray Road on the city's west side. The rural site is between Jerome and Washington townships, and is bisected by an existing railroad track near the Cosgray Road and Barronsmore Way intersection. It is also abutted by Ballantrae, a subdivision located to the east of the development. More below: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/01/02/housing-development-dublin-cosgray-ballantrae.html seems sprawly but just in a different way than 30-50 years ago with a bit more clustered housing and open areas that will probably not get a lot of use. *shrugs*
Create an account or sign in to comment