Jump to content

DTCL11

Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • Content Count

    256
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

174 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I suppose I missed this in all the hubbub but the lots on either side of Budd Dairy are pretty disappointing. And they don't seem to be short term lots either in terms of overall longevity if use. The drainage, curbs, islands, lighting, etc is all pretty legit and built for long term it seems. You'd think with all the delays and growth, they would have been able to commit to developing them in the near term rather than long term. https://www.columbusunderground.com/the-budd-dairy-co-bw1
  2. I'm not sure that's true but I'm sure there are semantics that make something about it true. CTA's (Chicago) Ventra system is account based as well. You can manage cards, amounts, etc via the website or very easy to use mobile app. The difference is you have a physical card to tap for CTA. I like the app function for COTA but I personally would rather just have the RFID card that you just tap and the fare is automatically deducted rather than purchasing a ticket each time in the app. I hope it someday COTA adds the option of auto reload as well rather than manually adding money each time. Funny enough, the COTA Connect App reminds me alot of the Dallas GoPass app about 5 years ago. That app has seen alot of improvements over the years and now integrates payments (account based), maps, trip planners, bus and rail schedules and tracking. Basically combining the COTA Connect and Transit App into one should be a priority on the technology side. My biggest complaint will always be why it seems that COTA seems to be trying to reinvent the wheel when there are already well established digital ticketing platforms, mapping, etc etc.
  3. I would tend to agree. The lot and small and has operated with 14 spots for this long, why does it suddenly need more? Not to mention the access issue. With the proximity of the convention center garage, the joseph garage, and even the new pearl garage, any extraordinary efforts to add parking seem out of place. Frankly, I'd rather see it infilled (the lot, not the pocket plaza) with some townhomes or something. But, it's not my building so....
  4. This is what it sounds like they are proposing. Can be open air or enclosed. And the structure can have any variation of architectural styles but this would be my guess as to what they are attempting to approve in terms of 'automated vertical parking'.
  5. It's interesting they bring up the massing. To me, the massing is appropriate given the content of the industrial buildings adjacent and generally on either side of the tracks. It's a nod to what was there. Even in these renderings they show existing buildings with similar massing. If it was somewhere else, i can see that argument but not here.
  6. My unverified guess is it's an old law that has become outdated. Probably came about in the times of outlawing dancing, alcohol, etc and people were too lazy to take it off the books. Cabarets are interpreted to mean "musical entertainment, singing, dancing or other form of amusement". NYC didn't repeal their cabernet laws until 2017 and they still have laws regulating establishments that allow dancing.... in 2020....
  7. Having a curb cut is not necessarily desired but turning the old service station into an integrated garage entrance is actually interesting. Sure, integrated into a restaurant space is probably better but it's better than a total demo. Sometimes I'm convinced these people think too highly of these communities (and I'll say 'our' since I'm a University District resident). This concept of 'overwhelming historic structures' is asinine. Is the structure gonna have a panic attack? The area around campus has been bastardized for decades by cheap landlords and small beans developers and commercial developers getting away with murder but NOW we suddenly care how a historic structure is going to feel next to a tall building. As if it's a continuous in tact neighborhood. Maybe the historic buildings felt underwhelmed by years of terrible development. I'm going to hate seeing uncommon 2.0. But at this point, I don't blame them.
  8. Don't get me wrong, I'm not *expecting* a tower. And allow me to clarify with it being a mid-rise tower not to exceed the Westminster-Thurber towers. I'm sure CASTO will come up with something very formulaic and copy paste. It's Just that there should be one included. The area of the CVS seems the most reasonable location given the proximity to the others and the lack of adjacent single family homes.
  9. Yes. Please. So much potential. And frankly, with the retirement homes, I'm not sure we shouldn't see a tower component toward the southwest part of this property. One certainly cannot argue a tower would be inappropriate with 3 12(ish) story buildings within a stone's throw.
  10. If VV doesnt take this, think I can convince Kaufman to buy the big lot behind Hound Dogs and put it up in old north by me?
  11. When the demand gets high enough, the trains won't be as much of a factor. For now, people have more choice, but some of the most expensive homes and apartments in cities with rail face similar issues but if the neighborhood is hot, people will put up with it. If it then becomes that much of a detractor, rents will reduce.
  12. Wow.... I don't hate it, for Franklinton or portions of Weinland Park, but wow.... and all that talk about bit trusting Kaufman for material selections and this is clearly nothing but thos cheap panels. When YIMBY turn into NIMBYs... my favorite plot twist... Its exposes the real YITBYs....
×
×
  • Create New...