Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Columbo

Columbus: North Market Developments and News

Recommended Posts

My wish would be for an underground parking garage with a multi-level market above it.  Add in some garage doors that would allow an open air market in nice weather. Get a top notch architect in to give a modern twist to the current market, and I think we'll be in business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^If you're thinking what I'm thinking...

 

markthal-rotterdam-market-hall-art-mvrdv-1.jpg


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

North Market redevelopment on tap as Columbus puts out call for ideas

 

north-market-2-social*750xx1787-1007-0-82.jpg

 

With demand strong for downtown land, it was almost inevitable that the North Market and its parking lot would become a target.

 

That day has come.

 

Columbus plans to issue a request for proposals in mid-October for the potential redevelopment of the 2.1-acre North Market site at 59 Spruce St.

 

What could that mean? That will be up to the developer proposals.

 

The only condition is that the North Market be included in the plan, said Columbus Development Director Steve Schoeny

 

"We’re not doing this because we have to," he told me. "We’re doing this because we should. If it doesn’t benefit the market, we won’t do a deal.”

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/09/14/north-market-redevelopment-on-tap-as-columbus-puts.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wish would be for an underground parking garage with a multi-level market above it.  Add in some garage doors that would allow an open air market in nice weather. Get a top notch architect in to give a modern twist to the current market, and I think we'll be in business.

 

I'd take it a step further.  Definitely like the addition of a multiple-level market- with actual market space on the ground floor rather than being a restaurant/incubator type space which is more what NM is now.  On top of that, though, I want to see mixed-use of some kind- offices, residential, etc.  Preferally 20+ stories would be great.  A real defining project for this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like what was posted, the Markthal in Rotterdam has all that.  The outside is residential and office space, while the "inside of the tube" is an open air market.  It wouldn't be a bad blueprint to use as a starting point.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Community Input Solicited for North Market Development Proposal

 

timthumb.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.columbusunderground.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F11%2Fnorth-market-02.jpg&q=90&w=650&zc=1&

 

Back in September, representatives from the City of Columbus and the North Market jointly announced that they would begin a public process to solicit proposals for the redevelopment of the North Market parking lot, which is owned by the City of Columbus. Tonight, the same representatives called together a public input session to solicit input and feedback from the community at large.

 

“So, why are on earth are we messing with the North Market… that’s the one question that everyone has,” stated City of Columbus Development Director Steve Schoeny. “What you may not realize, is that the way the North Market operates depends upon the parking lot fees. We’re trying to figure out if that’s still the best way to support the Market.”

 

More below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/community-input-solicited-for-north-market-development-proposal


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The city has released the names of developers who responded to the North Market RFP. There are no real surprises here, but 7 firms are now in the running. They are all local except for Indianapolis-based Flaherty & Collins.

 

I'm somewhat disappointed that Dublin-based Crawford Hoying is not listed, but overall there are no bad options here IMHO. (Thankfully, Carter, the developer of UO favorites HighPoint at Columbus Commons and Cincinnati's The Banks is absent as well) ;)

 

- Wood Companies

- CASTO

- Kaufman Development

- Lifestyle Communities

- Nationwide Realty Investors

- Flaherty & Collins

- Pizzuti

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/12/06/here-are-the-developers-that-want-to-build-the.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's a good list (except for two of them).  Hopefully some good stuff happens!


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there were 3...

 

City Narrows List of Developers for North Market Proposals

 

The City of Columbus has narrowed the list of finalists to develop the North Market parking lot to three. Nationwide Realty Investors, Pizzuti, and the Wood Companies/Schiff Capital Group are the developers that made the cut.

 

“We look forward to continuing our evaluation with these three teams,” said Development Director Steve Schoeny in a statement. “When we reviewed the requests for proposals, we wanted to make sure that potential developments made sense for the area and would be a good fit for the long run. We are pleased with the outstanding interest that we received.”

 

The three finalists will revise their proposals and a winner will be selected by the city and North Market in February of next year.

 

http://www.columbusunderground.com/city-narrows-list-of-developers-for-north-market-proposals-bw1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of wow, the fact the city garnered this level of interest is exciting. Its a major piece left in a dense and diverse area.... that said, this specific proposal (I cant believe i'm about to say this) seems a bit awkward for that spot.  It seems a little tall and very Texas circa 2005? anyone? Granted if it moves forward I will not be upset at all buuuuut it really needs refinement.

 

I cant say i'm surprised NRI had the dense proposal... let me guess... 5 story red brick and grey steel? Cool. Next.

 

I'm super intrigued to see Pizzuti's though, they're are a developer who seems to know how to build dense, modern, appropriate. I would argue office and residential is an amazing in this spot. Why not a hotel component? It seems 15-20 floors could be a solid height as well so lets see how it all unfolds.

 

Either way this is very exciting. Progress!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the kind of proposal I was expecting.  Was thinking/hoping for Markthal from Rotterdam or Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

That tower would certainly change the area - there's mainly just bars down Park Street and more restaurants to the east on High Street.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renderings of the Wood/Schiff proposal for a 35-story 'Market Tower,'

 

NolnmMM.jpg

 

 

I love how the Nationwide building looks like a vertical slice of the Death Star.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renderings of the Wood/Schiff proposal for a 35-story 'Market Tower,'

 

NolnmMM.jpg

 

 

I love how the Nationwide building looks like a vertical slice of the Death Star.

 

Haha I have never noticed this.... you're not wrong. This is awkward.

Yay brutalist skyscrapers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the kind of proposal I was expecting.  Was thinking/hoping for Markthal from Rotterdam or Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

 

I was thinking the exact same; not what I was expecting or wanted. These proposals are ridiculous and will kill the character of the North Market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the kind of proposal I was expecting.  Was thinking/hoping for Markthal from Rotterdam or Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

 

I was thinking the exact same; not what I was expecting or wanted. These proposals are ridiculous and will kill the character of the North Market.

 

Did you actually look at these proposals? I know at least for The Wood Company's proposal they specifically stated that they are leaving the North Market exactly as is. If you want to argue that building something on a parking lot is going to kill the character of the North Market then be my guest. If anything, these proposals will add to the vibrancy of this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the kind of proposal I was expecting.  Was thinking/hoping for Markthal from Rotterdam or Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

I was thinking the exact same; not what I was expecting or wanted. These proposals are ridiculous and will kill the character of the North Market. 

 

I do not agree that these proposals would kill the character of North Market, as the development is simply occupying the adjacent parking lot and the outdoor stalls that might be lost are not heavily used or long-standing/unique vendors. Its not like we are tearing down the open-air stalls at West Side Market.

 

There is perhaps, however, an opportunity to do something greater in terms of extending the physical market space. That would likely involve some significant public funding as markets are not lucrative or easy to finance (shorter term leases, non-credit tenants, etc.). The city's approach has been to see what the private development community can do with this site, so I am not too surprised with what has been proposed.

 

An incredible expansion of Seattle's Pike Place Market is now underway, with substantial city, parking revenue, private fundraising, and tax credit funds. You can read more here: http://pikeplacemarket.org/marketfront

 

If we want something like that, government and philanthropy will need to come to the table with capital.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the kind of proposal I was expecting.  Was thinking/hoping for Markthal from Rotterdam or Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

 

I was thinking the exact same; not what I was expecting or wanted. These proposals are ridiculous and will kill the character of the North Market. 

 

I think this is more the natural progression of not only the market but the area that it is in. It's a chance to not only expand the market but capitalize on its location; which all these proposals do in spades. I can see how the proposals take a simple, hometown, independent marketplace and warp it into another high-end, trendy, residential complex. However the parking lot has to go, and adding a large-scale residential complex not only capitalizes on its incredible location, but increases the potential usage of an expanded market. Something I truly like about the Wood/Schiff proposal is the indoor atrium planned to bridge the current market with the expansion over the lot. It would be nice to have it convertible to open-air during the summer months and glassed-in during the winter. Again, overall I personally am excited about the transformative nature of these proposals and eagerly await their completion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rejected: Four North Market Development Proposals That Didn’t Make The Final Cut

 

Kaufman Development

 

The proposal submitted by Kaufman Development and designed by NBBJ, imagines a contemporary six-story tiered structure that steps down to lower levels of retail and 23,000 square feet of roof-top greenspace. The proposed building included 65 apartment units, 32,000 square feet of retail space designated as an expansion for the North Market and restaurant use, as well as a 310-space parking garage underground.

 

timthumb.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.columbusunderground.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F12%2Fnm-kaufman-01.jpg&q=90&w=650&zc=1&

 

 

Flaherty & Collins

 

The Indianapolis-based Flaherty & Collins was the only non-local developer to submit a proposal for the North Market parking lot redevelopment site. Their proposal called for the construction of a 26-story tower on the site, containing 297 residential units ranging in size from 500 to 1,100 square feet, with amenities including a fitness facility, lounges, a business center, game room, and two “amenity decks”. The building would also include a 470-space parking garage, 26,000 square feet of retail space, and a central outdoor plaza.

 

nm-indy-04.jpg

 

 

CASTO

 

Local developer CASTO proposed an 18-story structure for the North Market parking lot site that would include a mix of 129 for-rent apartments and 82 for-sale condo units for a total of 211 new residences on the property. A three-story parking structure within the building was planned to accomodate 327 parking spaces while the ground floor contained 6,200 square feet of new North Market retail space and a two-story 8,500 square foot “North Market Food Lab” facing Spruce Street. Two different upper levels would be utilizes as amenity decks for residents.

 

nm-casto-04.jpg

 

 

Full article below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/rejected-four-north-market-development-proposals-that-didnt-make-the-final-cut


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

 

Riversouth is better suited for a tower, this area is already densely occupied and you really could've created something special without a tower here with residential.  It's an already gridlocked area that will be an absolute nightmare during a big convention or a large event at Nationwide.  It should've been entertainment and focused towards food, retail and the market itself instead of residential.  Could you imagine a large space for vendors during say the recent NHL All-Star Game or the Arnold?  You could've put another hotel on the lot and accomplished all of that without adding a ton of residents to the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

 

Riversouth is better suited for a tower, this area is already densely occupied and you really could've created something special without a tower here with residential.  It's an already gridlocked area that will be an absolute nightmare during a big convention or a large event at Nationwide.  It should've been entertainment and focused towards food, retail and the market itself instead of residential.  Could you imagine a large space for vendors during say the recent NHL All-Star Game or the Arnold?  You could've put another hotel on the lot and accomplished all of that without adding a ton of residents to the mix.

 

I'm sorry, your argument is that the city might get too dense?  My gosh, don't ever go to NYC or Chicago, your head might explode! In all seriousness, I've lived downtown for 16 years now, and I would hardly call traffic by the North Market or in the Short North gridlocked, not by any stretch of the imagination. And increased density is actually a good thing, by any measure. Will there be days where it's kinda crazy down there?  Sure, and I bet every single vendor in the market, and every single business in the area, will be absolutely thrilled every single time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

 

Riversouth is better suited for a tower, this area is already densely occupied and you really could've created something special without a tower here with residential.  It's an already gridlocked area that will be an absolute nightmare during a big convention or a large event at Nationwide.  It should've been entertainment and focused towards food, retail and the market itself instead of residential.  Could you imagine a large space for vendors during say the recent NHL All-Star Game or the Arnold?  You could've put another hotel on the lot and accomplished all of that without adding a ton of residents to the mix.

 

I'm sorry, your argument is that the city might get too dense?  My gosh, don't ever go to NYC or Chicago, your head might explode! In all seriousness, I've lived downtown for 16 years now, and I would hardly call traffic by the North Market or in the Short North gridlocked, not by any stretch of the imagination. And increased density is actually a good thing, by any measure. Will there be days where it's kinda crazy down there?  Sure, and I bet every single vendor in the market, and every single business in the area, will be absolutely thrilled every single time.

 

I have zero problem with density where it is appropriate. The Schottenstein's flat lot paradise on 3rd and 4th for example need these proposals more than this location does is all I am saying. That lot needs filled in but it should be an entertainment destination, not a place to live for that many people.  Plus I'm probably going to win this in the end because there is zero chance that Wood/Schiff have the money to see this through.  Something like Kaufman's proposal should've been selected.  I love Chicago btw and don't particularly care for NYC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked Flaherty's proposal the best, but it didn't make the cut.  I think of the finalists, without seeing NRI's, that Wood's is the best design and best for the area.

 

LOL at "too dense."  It's Columbus.  It's not going to be too dense.  The Convention Center will become more accessible now off of Goodale, so not ALL the traffic will spill out onto High Street.

 

http://614now.com/2016/business-2/north-markets-parking-lot-may-turn-into-a-skyscraper - More details on two of the finalists here.  The recent growth of Columbus and potential for this space makes me think Wood/Schiff will get the nod.  A spokesperson for the City (or North Market) mentioned an emphasis on residential, not so much office.  I think that will lean in favor of the Woods/Schiff proposal.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, Columbus does have to worry about "too dense" right now. Too dense leads to surface lots and empty land elsewhere in Columbus as it stands. 6-12 story development is what is needed now to kill those surface lots. Then we go back and knock down the 1-2 story '50s crap and put a 20 story up. We really don't want to disturb anything nice that's 3 stories plus either. Then after the city is actually dense we can wipe out the cheaply done 6-story stuff for 30+.

 

Of course, this is all Sim City talk. We don't get to have it our way. Landowners and developers make these decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, Columbus does have to worry about "too dense" right now. Too dense leads to surface lots and empty land elsewhere in Columbus as it stands. 6-12 story development is what is needed now to kill those surface lots. Then we go back and knock down the 1-2 story '50s crap and put a 20 story up. We really don't want to disturb anything nice that's 3 stories plus either. Then after the city is actually dense we can wipe out the cheaply done 6-story stuff for 30+.

 

Of course, this is all Sim City talk. We don't get to have it our way. Landowners and developers make these decisions.

 

Is this your opinion, or do you have facts to back it up?  Because I've seen nothing about "empty land" elsewhere in Columbus due to companies and people moving downtown. If anything, with 25K people/year moving to Columbus, increasing jobs, and increasing interest in people already here living downtown, developers should be building far higher than they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly there is a corollary in Cincinnati since Findlay Market has one large parking lot immediately north of the market, another one about a block west, and a small one about a block south.  So if this breaks ground it's going to give the City of Cincinnati a lot of ideas and we might end up with a ridiculously tall tower (or two) in the center of the historic district. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, Columbus does have to worry about "too dense" right now. Too dense leads to surface lots and empty land elsewhere in Columbus as it stands. 6-12 story development is what is needed now to kill those surface lots. Then we go back and knock down the 1-2 story '50s crap and put a 20 story up. We really don't want to disturb anything nice that's 3 stories plus either. Then after the city is actually dense we can wipe out the cheaply done 6-story stuff for 30+.

 

Of course, this is all Sim City talk. We don't get to have it our way. Landowners and developers make these decisions.

 

Is this your opinion, or do you have facts to back it up?  Because I've seen nothing about "empty land" elsewhere in Columbus due to companies and people moving downtown. If anything, with 25K people/year moving to Columbus, increasing jobs, and increasing interest in people already here living downtown, developers should be building far higher than they are.

 

Columbus' Downtown is larger than Cleveland's and Cincinnati's combined. It is a LOT of land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

 

Riversouth is better suited for a tower, this area is already densely occupied and you really could've created something special without a tower here with residential.  It's an already gridlocked area that will be an absolute nightmare during a big convention or a large event at Nationwide.  It should've been entertainment and focused towards food, retail and the market itself instead of residential.  Could you imagine a large space for vendors during say the recent NHL All-Star Game or the Arnold?  You could've put another hotel on the lot and accomplished all of that without adding a ton of residents to the mix.

 

It's not actually densely occupied.  Except right on High, almost all the surrounding buildings are only 1-4 stories.  That is NOT dense.  Most of the area is going to be redeveloped at some point with much taller, mixed-use development.  It's inevitable given the location.  This part of Downtown actually has low density.  In 2010, there were only 2,293 ppsm in this census block that include the North Market neighborhood, along High and the eastern sections of the Arena District.  It's probably come up a few hundred since then, but this would be considered low density population-wise. 

And for the love of god, the idea that bigger development should be stopped because there is a lot of traffic is complete nonsense.  It's Downtown... in a major city.  Vibrancy is the entire point.  If parking your car is the primary concern, perhaps urban discussion is not for you.  I don't mean to be flippant, but you present the very contradiction of what a walkable, urban environment should be.  Throwing up a tower in RiverSouth is fine, but what happens when that area gets too much traffic?  Back to low-rise?  Maybe 6 more parking garages on Front Street?  Come on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reason for loving the Pizzuti proposal is the exact reason I don't; I don't want another rehashed Aquatechtonica(sp?) building. If they used a different architect, perhaps I would like it more, but I still think the Wood proposal is the best one. As you say, it would be an iconic update of the Columbus skyline, and a fantastic addition to this area, IMO. Unfortunately, I think Pizzuti will indeed get the nod(assuming the mysterious NRI project doesn't), for the most Columbus reason ever; the 475 spot underground parking lot. The lack of parking built into the Wood proposal will, I think, sadly scuttle it. If they were to somehow add the underground parking from the Pizzuti propsal to their tower, I think it would win in a landslide.

 

I am very interested in the Pizzuti proposal. I am already concerned about Park Street going high-rise, and adding a 35-story tower to the North Market will endanger every non-significant historic building for future high-rises, especially as height pressure is spilling over from the Short North.

 

Wood's tower proposal would be perfect for 3rd or 4th, but absolutely not the North Market. For what it's worth, I really like the neoclassical modern aesthetic of Wood's new builds.

 

I think Pizzuti needs to upgrade the street-level in their proposal, but otherwise I think their project fits best. I love the design that's basically a high-rise version of the Joseph. Reminds me of a lot of developments in Rotterdam, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tallinn, et al.

 

My impression of the proposals:

 

Casto - too plastic-looking, but probably the best concept

Kaufman - best design, not a big enough proposal

Flaherty - carbon copy of one of their Indy projects

Wood - the iconic Class A tower Columbus is screaming for, on the wrong site

Pizzuti - the best overall mix of high design, context, concept, and just enough height

 

Really disagree with those who say this is the wrong site for a tower.  Why?  It's Downtown, and so long as it takes the market into account and is mixed-use, there is no reason it won't work.  Most of this area is currently low-mid rise, but that won't always be the case.  A project of this scale would likely spur additional development in the immediate area.  It's not just about the current state, but the future as well.  I'm tired of Columbus playing it safe with low-mid rise projects and bland design, exactly what I think Pizzuti's proposal is.  They've done some decent projects in the past, but I hate their proposal.  It's very underwhelming considering how much grander some of the other proposals were.  Kaufman's is certainly outside the box, but just too small and would be the least impactful.  Without knowing anything about NRI's proposal, it's hard to say.  Their "historic" description is a tease, because they're not well known for significant projects of late.  They built a 5-story brick on High Street not that long ago, and their other recent project at Parks Edge should've been much larger given the prime location.  In some ways, I think they play it the most conservative of all, so I remain skeptical that their proposal will be "historic" in any capacity, but I'm open to surprise.   

 

Also, keep in mind that all the proposals are just that.  Between now and actually breaking ground, all of them are likely to go through design changes, perhaps significant ones.  We don't know what the neighborhood/historic commissions are going to say about it.  The relative lack of parking with the Wood proposal is not really a problem (from an urban development standpoint), but even if so, it is not impossible for them to add a larger garage.  I mean, if they're willing to go 30+ stories, they can add 100 more spaces.

 

A thousand times this!  I mean, this site is just one block off High Street, for goodness sakes!  If not here, then you might as well say that there is NO good place to put a tower in this city. I don't remember hearing anyone arguing against the Millenium tower proposal on Front, again, just a block off High Street. Both projects are exactly what Columbus needs right now, tall towers which hopefully will spur further development near their respective locations, and architecturally new for Columbus. Good on Wood/Schiff for this proposal, and lets hope this is just the start of many such exciting proposals for the downtown.

 

Riversouth is better suited for a tower, this area is already densely occupied and you really could've created something special without a tower here with residential.  It's an already gridlocked area that will be an absolute nightmare during a big convention or a large event at Nationwide.  It should've been entertainment and focused towards food, retail and the market itself instead of residential.  Could you imagine a large space for vendors during say the recent NHL All-Star Game or the Arnold?  You could've put another hotel on the lot and accomplished all of that without adding a ton of residents to the mix.

 

I'm sorry, your argument is that the city might get too dense?  My gosh, don't ever go to NYC or Chicago, your head might explode! In all seriousness, I've lived downtown for 16 years now, and I would hardly call traffic by the North Market or in the Short North gridlocked, not by any stretch of the imagination. And increased density is actually a good thing, by any measure. Will there be days where it's kinda crazy down there?  Sure, and I bet every single vendor in the market, and every single business in the area, will be absolutely thrilled every single time.

 

I have zero problem with density where it is appropriate. The Schottenstein's flat lot paradise on 3rd and 4th for example need these proposals more than this location does is all I am saying. That lot needs filled in but it should be an entertainment destination, not a place to live for that many people.  Plus I'm probably going to win this in the end because there is zero chance that Wood/Schiff have the money to see this through.  Something like Kaufman's proposal should've been selected.  I love Chicago btw and don't particularly care for NYC.

 

Why in the world would they propose something they couldn't build?  The city didn't ask for fantasy proposals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, Columbus does have to worry about "too dense" right now. Too dense leads to surface lots and empty land elsewhere in Columbus as it stands. 6-12 story development is what is needed now to kill those surface lots. Then we go back and knock down the 1-2 story '50s crap and put a 20 story up. We really don't want to disturb anything nice that's 3 stories plus either. Then after the city is actually dense we can wipe out the cheaply done 6-story stuff for 30+.

 

Of course, this is all Sim City talk. We don't get to have it our way. Landowners and developers make these decisions.

 

Is this your opinion, or do you have facts to back it up?  Because I've seen nothing about "empty land" elsewhere in Columbus due to companies and people moving downtown. If anything, with 25K people/year moving to Columbus, increasing jobs, and increasing interest in people already here living downtown, developers should be building far higher than they are.

 

Columbus' Downtown is larger than Cleveland's and Cincinnati's combined. It is a LOT of land.

 

And if vacancy rates were high or population growth was stagnant or low, maybe your point would make more sense.  Neither of those things is true, though.  Residential vacancy is very low throughout Central Ohio, let alone just in the city or Downtown.  Both the city and metro are growing the fastest they have in 50 years.  A single 30+ story mixed-use tower (with maybe 100-250 units) is not going to saturate the market and kill projects in other parts of the city.  Consider that that architectural ugly duckling HighPoint was the equivalent of a 30-story and yet since then, there have been multiple other projects to start construction or be proposed within a block of it- most of them not on existing surface lots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked Flaherty's proposal the best, but it didn't make the cut.  I think of the finalists, without seeing NRI's, that Wood's is the best design and best for the area.

 

LOL at "too dense."  It's Columbus.  It's not going to be too dense.  The Convention Center will become more accessible now off of Goodale, so not ALL the traffic will spill out onto High Street.

 

 

Wow. If you read the comments after the article you get the idea most people don't want anything at all built there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Downtown Columbus could support a population of 100,000+ at an average of 8-10 stories. Look at all that unutilized/underutilized land north of Spring. Downtown includes Franklinton. The SE side of Downtown is a bunch of warehouses. If you really know Columbus and have been in and out of Downtown since I first started remembering things in oh 1982, you recognize these areas that are far from the well-known parts. Neilston. 5th STREET. Hocking. How about that entire "peninsula" that only holds the ramp from West Mound to the bridge over the Split that hasn't been used since 1972? We are blessed and cursed by the sheer amount of land. I could build a motocross track Downtown and nobody would care.

 

It was long enough ago that when you went to the doctor, you went Downtown. Shopping at the malls was OK, but if you wanted the good stuff you went Downtown. Lawyers were all Downtown. Wanted to invest in the market? Downtown. 400 West Rich? How about 400 EAST Rich, the crazy building with all the levels? You couldn't walk 15 feet without climbing a staircase. Main Library for everything since branches were like 2,000 square feet. I suppose a lot was going on on Morse and 161 but we never went up there since we lived in Groveport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...