Investigation 3: Urbanism at Home in the City by Joshua Bauman

FINAL INVESTIGATION Joshua Bauman

The present day city of Columbus, Ohio is a growing metropolitan environment. Situated in the relatively central geographic region of Ohio, the city has witnessed many stages of development that are common amongst cities in the United States. Following its foundation, it grew significantly to be the largest city in Ohio and among the largest in the United States (). To many, Columbus is an economic success story, fairing economic downfalls better than most cities because of its broad economic base and resilient education and healthcare industries. However, Columbus has been met with many challenges. While it is a desirable place to live because of its broad employment and educational possibilities, it has also greatly suffered from significant urban sprawl. Unlike Cincinnati or Cleveland, Columbus is not bounded on one side. It has successfully expanded in every direction, with the greatest amount of growth occurring to the North and West. It has had little reason to try and compact itself, and has lost a sense of density in its downtown because of the amount of sprawl that has been experienced. Columbus has been intersected time and again by â&#x20AC;&#x153;inner-beltsâ&#x20AC;? that allow commuters to slip in for work and back out to go home to the suburbs. The 270 outer-belt fueled this flame further by allowing minimal interaction with the city at all. In recent times, as city master plans, development strategies, and economic reinvestment zones are being planned left and right, the city of Columbus is searching for an identity that it presently lacks. Through my investigation, I will be analyzing areas of varying urban identities throughout the city, comparing their success in terms of developing a more identifiable Columbus. My hometown of Granville, Ohio has a much more obvious identity. The village has retained much of its historical foundation, with strict policy and parameters that have controlled the townĘźs growth and development

Granville

Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

to the extent that it is as easily defined today as it was decades ago. This control is far easier to accomplish when, from an early stage of development, there is a goal to maintain a specific culture and infrastructural fabric, along with keeping a lock on population expansion. To some, Granville is a suburb of Columbus. Considering the geographic distance between the two and the overall development patterns, I argue that Granville is a sub-rural community. It is an independent town that has maintained a consistent, though homogenous, identity and purpose since very early in its history. It is a very appropriate contrast to the city of Columbus. Columbus, like Granville, had very specific rationale for its foundation. For Granville, this rationale was a recreation of a New England town with hope of a healthy manufacturing community. Columbus was founded to be

the capital for the state of Ohio. For Granville, this goal changed when contextual conditions changed, and its new identity as an educational center has defined its growth and present environment. Columbus has remained the civic center of Ohio, but along the way grown with an eclectic mixture of areas of emphasis. These contrasting histories dominate the differences in present conditions of both places, because, at the root of it all, Columbus and Granville are just human-defined places that have human-defined boundaries within which particular humans conduct business and/or reside. It is the identity of these locations that I will argue is what defines their success as more than a place, but as an entity of the landscape.

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 1

Space-Time 2

In order to identify the disjointed identities of Columbus, I will venture into places that are particularly reminiscent of spaces of strong identity in my hometown of Granville. Many similarities and differences can be seen between the two geographic locations throughout the little more than 200 years that either has existed, and I will analyze Columbus in relation to Granville at three specific space-times: Space-Time 1 [2000 to present]: Since the new millennium, the expansive city limits of Columbus have been losing population to the peripheral suburban communities that define its metropolitan scope. While Columbus supports such a wide variety of resources within its geopolitical boundary, these exterior communities boast very individualistic developments that promote a greater feeling of inclusion. I will compare this to the struggles of Granville in trying to curtail its population by intentionally pushing development to outside of its village limits in order to maintain its individualistic atmosphere. In analyzing these differences, I will venture to the Arena District in downtown Columbus to investigate how it has been constructed to act as a suburban community atmosphere that boasts an atmosphere that draws people in. Space-Time 2 [present]: Between Granville and Columbus, the connections have only grown over the past decade as Columbus continues to spur growth further outward and Granville始s influence expands past its own rigid borders. In relating my own experience travelling between the two, specifically my movement and cohabitation between my home in Granville and my temporary residence at Ohio State始s campus in Columbus, I choose to examine a physical representation of the otherwise socio-economic relationship. My journey analyzes Bexley, Ohio, an independent, small city and home to small private college Capital University, that grew adjacent to Columbus until being completely surrounded but still maintains its independence. Space-Time 3 [1812-1850]: Finally, I look back and dig deeper into the initial foundations of both Granville and Columbus, following Three Journeys their relatively similar initial settlements and greatly differing subsequent growth and expansion periods: Granville desired to grow into a manufacturing powerhouse but was bypassed by the national infrastructure in the early 1800s, causing the village to close ranks and focus its economic efforts; Columbus was settled to be the capital of Ohio and was explicitly connected to national infrastructure, both the National Road and the Ohio-Erie Canal, and witnessed explosive and diverse population and economic growth as a result. My journey to the historic downtown core of Columbus analyzes how the historical foundation literally laid the groundwork for the present lack of identity in the historic city core.

Space-Time 1

Three Space-Times

All Images Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

Space-Time 3

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 2

Space-Time 1: Columbus & Suburbanization [2000-present]

! (

CITY OF COLUMBUS

! (

(!( ! (!

2000 - 2010 CHANGE FOR

( ! (!(! ! (! (

( ! ( ! ( ! ! (

! (

LOSS

! (

17 9

00 ,5

0, -1

50 1

! (

! ( 00

! (

-2

! ( !(

! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

GAIN

-5

! (

! ( ! (

4 Miles

POPULATION CHANGE BY CENSUS TRACT

! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ! ( (! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( (! ( ! ( ! (! (! ! ( ! (

! (( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! (! (! ( ! (( ! (! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ( ! ( ! (! (! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( (! (! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! (

2, 5

! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! (! (

-2

! (

! ( ! (

THE TOTAL POPULATION

-4

! ( ! ( ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( (! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ! ! ( ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

! (

-2

! ( ! ( !( ! ( ! ( ! (

25 0

2/17/2012

50 0

While I was arriving in and acclimating to Granville in 2000, the outskirts of Columbus had continued to prosper. Metropolitan Columbus was growing, but predominantly in the periphery of the city, with many residential and commercial developments that responded to the population influx throughout the late 1990s and 2000s (drawthelinemidwest.org 2011). Like in Granville, many of the independent cities that bordered Columbus (Hilliard, Westerville, Dublin, Pataskala, New Albany, Gahanna, Reynoldsburg, etc.) were all experiencing population growth while also attempting to maintain their identities instead of becoming a ‘placeless political city,ʼ a notion that Lefebvre (2003) introduces in “The Urban Revolution” (9). This notion has become a reality for Columbus, only being understood as the center of independent suburban communities because the supposedly urban core lacks an identity to draw people to live there. Columbus further supports Lefebvreʼs (2003) idea of the urban fabric, as defining everything that supports a city (including the surrounding communities, like the Columbus suburbs) while not necessarily being an ‘urbanʼ condition (4). In Granville, any population growth was met by strict regulation in terms of space and economic status. Zoning restrictions disallowed the development of the protected village green space, and available property was often the most expensive land that had not been economically feasible for previous rounds of development. This forced a large amount of the growth to outside to the neighboring city of Newark (Barno 2013, 3). Granville was disallowing any significant change to its identity, a very different scenario than the city of Columbus, which was desperately trying to bring in residential development to reinvigorate its empty downtown (drawthelinemidwest.org 2011). In Columbus, this time period saw the opening of Easton Town Center, an indoor/outdoor shopping center built to bring all shopping together in one high-

Source: 2000 & 2010 U.S. Census

Total Population 2010 Population: 787,033 2000 Population: 711,470 Percent Increase: 10.6% This map depicts population change at the Census tract level within Columbus only. In some instances the data reflected represents a subset of blocks within a particular tract in order to better match the Columbus City boundary.

! ( ! ( City of Columbus Department of Development Planning Division

! (

City of Columbus Department of Development Planning Division (2012). City of Columbus 2000-2010 Change for the Total PopulaƟon. Retrieved from hƩp://development.columbus.gov/demographics/census/maps.aspx

COLUMBUS PLANNING DIVISION

109 N. FRONT STREET

COLUMBUS, OH 43215

end environment. The retail center spurred the construction of the surrounding area, including office complexes, new headquarters, apartments, recreation fields and venues, new transportation hubs for the Central Ohio Transit Authority, and an immense economic stimulus for the adjacent Columbus suburb of Gahanna (“Easton Town Center” 2011). During this time of immense successful growth on the periphery, downtown Columbus saw the demolition of City Center Mall which once defined a significant area right in downtown (where the Columbus Commons now exists) and urging redevelopment to bring people back downtown drawthelinemidwest.org 2011). Following the failure of this independent entity, a call for urban revitalization was met in the investment by Nationwide in the development of the Arena District. This new neighborhood was designed as an all-inclusive district that promoted an urban lifestyle of clustered amenities within a walkable footprint, combining massive entertainment venues, retail, dining, residential, and office development (“Arena District” 2013). The density produced by this redevelopment area is considered a ‘suburbanizationʼ of downtown, as it utilizes its “size…as a function of the social relationships to be served” (Mumford 2011, 95). FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 3

Space-Time 1: Columbus & Suburbanization [2000-present] In order to better understand the intended use of this district, I decided to take a journey to experience it firsthand. In terms of experience, it was important for me to take a mode of transportation that both related to my childhood in Granville and how I discovered that territory, and also in looking ahead at the trends of young professionals in thriving cities. So, I decided to deploy the old bicycle. As a child, a bicycle is merely recreational equipment. However, as you grow older you realize its efficiency as a regular mode of transportation. So, I chose to make my way from Ohio State始s campus to the Arena District via the OlentangyScioto recreational trail and greenway. I took my journey on a Sunday morning, November 16. It was chilly but not particularly windy, so it was a comfortable day for a bike ride. Starting out on the bike path, it was quite different from the rail-to-trail that runs through Granville. As opposed to the wooded path I was used to, the Olentangy trail runs along the river, whose riparian zone does little to define an overwhelming natural corridor. It actually left me feeling quite exposed, running along major infrastructural routes, as opposed to the secluded, one-with-nature atmosphere of the abandoned railway that was reclaimed as a trail just as its surroundings reclaimed its undisturbed nature. The trail came very close to the 315 highway at multiple points, and occasionally the path runs underneath the road at minimum clearance (1).

Images Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

Photograph by Author (2013)

Blue Jackets (2013). Arena District Parking Update. Retrieved from h譬p://bluejackets.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=75841

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 4

Space-Time 1: Columbus & Suburbanization [2000-present]

END

START 2 Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

After my short yet unexpectedly strenuous journey (again, this trip along a riparian zone and dodging around various urban disturbances made for a very undulating ride. I arrived at the North Bank Park, to a lovely view of downtown Columbus (2), one that I had never experienced before from the pedestrian angle. During my brief visits to the Arena District, I had never approached it from the south side, so I was truly getting the experience of the young, active person who uses recreational trails in the city and experiences the walkable districts without arriving by vehicle. I first happened upon a residential complex (3) that was organized with a courtyard and urban parking court, with a distinct feeling of urbanity by its sheer scale, although it lacked an activity that identified its planned density of residents. Staying on my bike, I traveled towards Nationwide Boulevard, the main circulatory piece in the district. A unique aspect of the street is that only brick pavers define the material, with traffic lines integrated into the pattern instead of being painted on top (10). I chose to venture west on this sophisticated roadway, away from the primary active core of the district and towards some of the more unique spaces that make the district diverse.

After venturing through the parking lots of various buildings that had been renovated and repurposed with office space, I came to the old Buggyworks building: â&#x20AC;&#x153;Once the largest manufacturer of buggies in the world, this century-old manufacturing facility is being transformed into a true urban village where one can Live, Work and Play. The Buggyworks features authentic urban lofts and unique work environments designed to meet the needs of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s creative classâ&#x20AC;? (as read on the sign posted at the site) (5). This quote really speaks to the understanding of a truly urban environment: somewhere that people can live, work, and fulfill entertainment desires within close quarters. This is an opposition to the suburban ideal that a person is comfortable if necessary amenities are a short car ride away, as Mackinder (1907) critiques in the development of suburbs as a place to live away from autonomous centers of business and commerce (335). Truly urban conditions allow for people to exist and circulate to necessities without dependence on mechanically transporting themselves somewhere.

Photographs by Author (2013)

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 5

Space-Time 1: Columbus & Suburbanization [2000-present] The complex has paid special attention to preserve some of the historic elements of the old industrial site, including exposed roofing beams that define Firestone Alley (4), original bricks that line the drive, and other character that has been retained and is proudly visible. This end of the district is very quiet, with even fewer signs of life. I journey back towards the center of the Arena District, circling the Huntington baseball stadium and riding adjacent to the LC indoor/outdoor music pavilion. I next arrived at the heart of the district, the Nationwide Arena. The entire area has been developed around this piece, which is a highly integrated piece, opposed to many arenas and stadiums that stand on their own amongst a sea of parking. This district has curtailed its surface parking by strategic and ample parking garages. While evident, the uninterrupted density of building space preserves a very urban atmosphere, allowing for open space to be utilized by the sea of people that naturally flow in and out of such large capacity entertainment venues. Pedestrian alleys are the dominant circulation, (7) and it really makes the district feel very friendly and walkable, with a satisfying scale (9). The separation of transportation corridors (8) is another unique feature that really emphasizes the pedestrian experience. Other retained history of the site includes a transplanted historic entryway (6) to the railroad station that was occupied part of the site, showing an understanding of past uses and celebrating the progress of the area. Ultimately, the Arena District has many elements that make it such a successful urban neighborhood, including the inclusion of a variety and density of program, with great emphasis on the pedestrian, a very urban notion that supports a lifestyle of

END

START 2 Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

independence, something that really identifies an area as a place where sophisticated, active people can stroll, catch sport games or large cultural events, eat, shop, and live, the most striking component of this integrated district.

Photographs by Author (2013)

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 6

Space-Time 1: Columbus & Suburbanization [2000-present] While recent redevelopments in downtown have been responding to people returning to live in the “trendy” urban areas closer to the Columbus core, suburbanization continues to the be overwhelming trend, as can be easily seen in the population projections (drawthelinemidwest.org 2011), as evidenced in this diagram titled “Population shifts.” Columbus is forming as a political city, defined by the organized, civil life of people, with the surrounding smaller towns and villages (as defined by Columbus neighborhoods and peripheral suburbs) as part of the cityʼs governmental jurisdiction, a transition that Lefebvre (2003) identifies as an urban reality (9). Columbus has successfully identified itself as a civic center of culture and education, boasting the assets of a state capital. It has also been successful by developing entertainment venues that only cities can really boast, because they act as the sink for surrounding areas, drawing in people far beyond its immediate urban fabric. It has followed Mumfordʼs vision of “the city in its complete sense…a geographic plexus, an economic organization, and institutional process, a theater of social action, and an aesthetic symbol of collective unity” (2011, 94). However, there is a lack of consistency in Columbusʼs draw, as events and special visits provide only temporary habitation. It is a true commuter city, because even people who do more than work in the city will eventually move outwards again and return to suburban residences. While Columbus has far more people to serve than a little village like Granville, Ohio, and a heterogeneous population at that, its wide range of services disallows its ability to have a holistic identity. As Mackinder (1907) recognized in the “third round of development” in English boroughs (338), suburbs have the ability to maintain specialties that directly benefit their more homogenous populations. They have fewer dissenting interests to consider, whereas a city is defined by a heterogeneity that manipulates the pattern of development in a city into neighborhoods that represent a smaller percentage of a specialized population. It is far more difficult for an urban center to have a single specialty, and over the past decade Columbus has struggled to define its core, which has only encouraged sprawling communities outside of the city to define their own specialties, taking away more and more population from the cityʼs core. U.S. Census Bureau data processed by USA Today (2010). PopulaƟon ShiŌs. Retrieved from hƩp://drawthelinemidwest.org/ohio/census-shows-columbus-growth-was-uneven/

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 7

Space-Time 2: An Urban University [present] I went “away” to school at Ohio State, just north of downtown Columbus, but I never felt too far from home. Traveling between Columbus and Granville has become totally secondnature to me, and it seems as if they two are intrinsically connected. However, in considering the differences between where I reside at Ohio State versus my home in Granville, it brings up the question of whether I would feel more at home at a university of a scale more similar to my village. In examining Columbus and its various facets, the area of Bexley caught my interest. While it is not technically part of the city of Columbus, its location and vicinity to downtown are intriguing conditions for my analysis. My question now is, if I went to a small university in a more suburban setting of Columbus than the densely populated parameters of Ohio State, would it better resemble my sub-rural hometown?

Housing Values

Bachelorʼs Degrees

Household Income

Caucasian Households

American Dirt (2009). [see individuals]. Retrieved from hƩp://dirtamericana.blogspot.com/2009/12/invisible-fences-for-humans-part-i.html

Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

While Granville may be considered a ‘technoburbʼ (Fishman 2011, 75), with its own independent development of technological corporations (like the research and development campus of Owens Corning) alongside its independent retail, green space, etc., many similarities can be found in the enveloped Columbus suburb of Bexley. The city was founded independently of Columbus, but, as with other neighboring settlements like Worthington and Franklinton, Bexley was eventually enveloped by the Columbus city limits (“Columbus, Ohio” n.d.). Since that time, Bexley has struggled to maintain its independence as an enclave. It has retained its downtown as well as its very suburban demographics. As seen in the census maps below, Bexley (highlighted by the yellow outline) maintains greater concentrations (as shown by the darkest color, which demonstrates the highest concentration) of bachelorʼs degree holders, a much higher median income, and an overwhelmingly Caucasian community (almost 90%) (“Invisible Fences for Humans” 2009). Like Denison University in Granville, Bexley houses a small, private, liberal arts university that significantly defines the community, acting as the catalyst for economic development and demographic identity within Bexley.

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 8

Space-Time 2: An Urban University [present] Capital University was originally founded as a German Seminary in 1830, with fluctuating locations in and around downtown Columbus. In 1850, Capital University was chartered as a partner to the seminary, and by 1857 the university decided to purchase land further outside of Columbus to allow for expansion. Capital University moved to its present location on Main Street in Bexley in 1876, and has expanded to educate over 3,500 students annually (“Capital University” n.d.). My journey to Capital University occurred on November 27, 2013, beginning at 12:30pm. The brisk day was met with sun occasionally bursting through the otherwise overcast cloud cover. Arrival to Capital is less direct than Ohio State, but still only two roads eventually lead to Capitalʼs front door, an ill-structured green space that fronts Main Street. There are some light post banners that announce the universityʼs vicinity, and only the awkwardly expansive green space really signifies the campusʼs identity. The trip started at the northeast corner of the tightly wrapped campus (1), where an unforgiving brutalist building cumbersomely meets the corner. Moving further south, the campus has a hard wall of buildings that form an exterior wall to the interior campus. The physical recreation building sits on the opposite side of the street, poorly labeled and lackluster. At Ohio State, the campus buildings demonstrate an undeniably eclectic mix of architectural styles and urban strategies in their relationships with other buildings, campus roads, and pedestrian avenues. There is no overwhelming style, not even amongst the extensive new construction. Capital University, on the other hand, has a cohesive identity, but that identity is entirely uninspiring, showing little innovation or initiative that the aspiration banners (2) on campus indicate otherwise. The visitorʼs center (3) faces away from the street where visitors enter, a problematic condition.

END START

12 9

7 5

6 3

Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author Photographs by Author (2013)

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 9

Space-Time 2: An Urban University [present] 4

Photographs by Author (2013)

The Lutheran ties of the university are very evident by the freely displayed Christmas tree (4) and the religious center that defines the center of the campus (5). Otherwise, the campus organization feels very much like subsequent editions to a church, only designed for occupation rather than inspiration. One courtyard space is well defined by its peripheral buildings (6), but green space across campus is poorly executed, particularly the main quad space (7) that is met on two edges by road, creating more of an unusable front lawn than a recreational and gathering space. Some historic buildings (8) are preserved but left unused on campus. The Seminary building is a rather impressive complex, sitting on the northwest edge of campus, more or less the defining gateway coming from downtown Columbus (10). Commercial space, such as the apparently historic Drexel Theater (11), across the street from the campus is marketed towards the culture of college students. A ceremonial entry gate to campus (12) is formal and unimpressive. Its axis with the conservatory

of music building is hindered by the monolithic brutalist library that fronts Main Street, a complete misrepresentation of the university始s identity (or lack thereof). Finally, as with most college campuses, the student body spurs development of exterior housing, with one complex (13) that is a completely absurd addition to the surrounding residential neighborhood, as it is three stories taller than any of the neighboring buildings. Altogether, the Capital University campus was overwhelmingly disappointing. For such a small university that can assert greater control over its image than the ever flailing Ohio State University, the development of Capital始s campus organization as well as the buildings themselves leave much to be desired. It has the potential to be a compact, well-organized series of spaces, but the current identity of the campus is in need of a savior.

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 10

Space-Time 2: An Urban University [present]

Stanbery Avenue

Delmar Drive

ery

iv e

Columbus Avenue

Ruhl Avenue

Stanbery Avenue

Northview Drive

Stanb

Allegheny Avenue

Bellwood Avenue

Cassady Avenue

Caroline Avenue

Maryland Avenu e

Pl ne

Ashbour

Denver Avenue

Clifton Avenue

Gould Road

Roosevelt Avenue

Merkle Road

Remington Road

Stanwood Road

Ardmore Road

Cassingham Road

Cassady Avenue

ions Sess

Dawson Avenue

ad Stre East Bro

el Circle ex

Bulitt Park Place

Meadow Park Avenue

d Stre East Broa Drive

Merkle Road

Ardmore Road

Park South

Roosevelt Avenue

Denver Avenue

Stanbery Avenue

Commonwealth

Park North

Ashbourne Road

Commonwealth

Drexel Avenue

Parkview Avenue

ace

Boston Avenue

Bexford Place Powell Avenue Powell Avenue

Powell Avenue

Seneca Park Place

Elm Avenue

Elm Avenue Elm Avenue

Elm Avenue

Dale Avenue

Plymouth Avenue

rk Pa

Drexel Avenue

Westland Avenue

e riv

Columbia Avenue

Fair Avenue

Parkview Avenue

Hil

Brentwood Road

Bexley Park Road

Bryden Road

Sherwood Road

East Main Street East Main Street

Grandon Avenue

Chelsea Avenue

Vernon Road Charles Street

Roosevelt Avenue

D r. S

Remington Road

enue

Aven

Charles Street

venwood Ha Dr. N

Montrose Avenue

Astor Avenue

Francis Avenue

dan

ge Av

C ou r t

Pleasant Ridge Avenue

Colle

Sheri

She r ida n

Astor Avenue

Cassingham Road

Mound Street

Euclaire Avenue

I often view Granville as a sub-rural escape from my very urbanized university of Ohio State. While it is not located in “downtown” Columbus, OSU is located to the north of downtown amongst the sprawling residential neighborhoods of Columbus past, present and future. This places OSU in the truest “urban” atmosphere of being surrounded by dense human activity, as described by Engels (1998) in “The Great Towns” to produce include crowding, filth, disease, crime, congestion, and emergencies. However, community and cultural events are also apparent within the diverse, Midwestern metropolis that is Columbus, with (Engels 1998). Bexley is also in close proximity to Columbus, but it has maintained its own identity by having its own government and city regulations (“Invisible Fences for Humans” 2009). This allows the city to better serve its specific population, a notion suggested by Mackinder (1997) in terms of exterior boroughs “re-urbanizing” via particular specialties to focus on centralization (338), with Bexley specializing in education and development for its concentrations of high income, high housing values, high bachelorʼs degree holders, and majorly white households. As my understanding of the urban landscape that I reside in semi-permanently increases, so does my comprehension of the sub-rural landscape that defines Granville. Columbus epitomizes the urban landscape as a center of a significant urban fabric, where rural environments serve urban environments, as supported by Lefebvre (2003, 8). Granville serves as an idyllic town that moderates the rural environment defined by vegetation, while benefitting from the amenities of an urban infrastructure. In regards to the two extremes defined by Columbus and Granville, Bexley is about the middle ground; a suburban location where urban density (as evident by the large portion of high density neighborhoods in the zoning document to the right) and the pastoral aesthetic, as described by Marx (2000) in terms of the idyllic New World (100), can coexist.

Farnd

Place

ce ale Pla

eld Mayfi

Livingston Avenue Livingston Avenue

Single Family Residential

Commercial

R-1 Low Density

PUC Planned Unit Commercial

R-2 Intermediate

MUC Mixed Use Commercial

R-3 Medium Density

CS Commercial Service

R-6 High Density

GC General Commercial OC Office Commercial

Multi-Family Residential

NC Neighborhood Commercial

R-12 Low Density Multi-Family Residential PUR Planned Unit Residential

Park & Institutional

City of Bexley Zoning

OS Open Space District CP Campus Planning District (Zone 1) CP Campus Planning District (Zone 2)

March 2012 0

465

930

1,860 Feet

www.bexley.org

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 11

Space-Time 3: Historic Columbus [1812-1850]

PlaƩ, Hiram (1819). Plat of Columbus, As Incorporated 8th Jun. 1818. Retrieved from The Ohio gazeƩeer, or, topographical dicƟo nary: describing the several counƟes, towns, villages, canals, roads, rivers, lakes, springs, mines &c., in the state of Ohio (1819) by John Kilbourn.

Many of the towns and settlements in Ohio at the turn of the 19th century were frontier settlements founded by New Englanders. My hometown of Granville was one of those towns, founded by settlers from Massachusetts and Connecticut for fertile land in a new location. The initial organization of early Granville was decided by the New England Puritans that settled there (Barno 2013, 3). Their religious dedication was the center point, with the main circulatory thoroughfares, meeting at an intersection known as the “Public Square.” This square is defined at its four corners by four Christian denominations (Granville Historical Society). Within the early days of Granville, the settlers expected the town to become a large, expansive manufacturing town. However, the geographic location

The Columbus Railway Co. (1901). WyandoƩe Building. Retrieved from hƩp://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/mmh/OldColumbus/downtown.cfm

the settlers had chosen for its topographic advantages lacked proximity to the major infrastructural installations of Ohio at the time. Granville was too far north of the National Road and too far east of the Ohio canal system to become a node either (Granville Historical Society). Otherwise, it lacked the nodality to become a major power, leading to its foundation as an educational center instead of physical industry. This is contrary to Mackinderʼs idea that “modern industrial towns, based on local supplies of mechanical powers of metals, may grow large enough although lacking much nodality… But, if such communities endure, they tend to create a kind of artificial nodality” (1907, 330) because its lack of nodality did in fact hinder its ability to become a manufacturing power. FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 12

Space-Time 3: Historic Columbus [1812-1850] As opposed to Granvilleʼs otherwise arbitrary settlement, Columbus was founded with great strategy and organizational thought. Following Ohioʼs statehood in 1803, there was a debate over the location of its capital. Chillicothe and Zanesville had both held the title, but the Ohio Legislature desired a centralized spot to become the permanent location for the Ohio Statehouse (). In surveying the frontier settlements, like Worthington or Franklinton, it made sense to locate the new capital in a central geographic region. The intersection of the Scioto and Olentangy Rivers near the geographic center of Ohio seemed the ideal spot, which Cox recognizes as having great nodal potential by its interpenetration of water for commerce or transportation (2012, 5). This location had already been an important trading and navigational route for Native Americans. This Native American Scioto Trail followed the Scioto, Lower Scioto, and Sandusky Rivers from Lower Shawnee Town (modern day Portsmouth) in the south on the Ohio River to Lake Erie to the north (“Highway Chronicle” 2013). “Prior to the state legislatureʼs decision in 1812, Columbus did not exist. The city was designed from the first as the stateʼs capital, preparing itself for its role in Ohioʼs political, economic, and social life” (“Columbus, Ohio” n.d.). The initial organization was intended to take the high ground along the Scioto, across from the neighboring settlement Franklinton. The city grid was skewed 12 degrees west of north to line up with the earlier Franklinton settlement. The original statehouse was constructed in 1814, and by 1834, with a population of 4000, it became a ‘cityʼ (“Columbus, Ohio” 2012). The growth of Columbus can be attributed to its transportation proximity, including the Ohio and Erie Canal (connected to Columbus in 1831) and the National Road (which had been constructed to Columbus come 1836) (“Highway Chronicle” 2013). With these connections, plus railroads coming in the 1950s, Columbus became a prosperous and growing city, held steady with the backbone of civic amenities and state government (“Columbus, Ohio” n.d.).

Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author Granville Historical Society. n.d. The Most Eligible Part [Map], Retrieved from Granville Historical Society Museum.

Riches, William (1830). Columbus. Retrieved from The Ohio Historical Society.

Melish, John (1812). Map of Ohio. Retrieved from hƩp://learn.uakron.edu/beyond/naƟveAm_ earlyState.htm

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 13

Space-Time 3: Historic Columbus [1812-1850] All Photographs by Author (2013)

12 START END 1

10 7

2 14

6 5

4 3

Image Retrieved from Bing Maps (2013) & Manipulated by Author

To analyze the growth of Columbus from its civic center, I chose to journey to the historic Capitol Square. Capitol Square is the heart of downtown Columbus and has changed over time as the city has grown. The square remains as originally planned, on the corner of the two original arteries of Columbus, High Street (running North-South) and Broad Street (running East-West). My journey began on a comfortable Sunday afternoon in autumn (November 3) after arriving downtown by COTA bus. Contrary to my initial plan, the bus dropped me off at the northeast corner of the square. There is a small church (1) on the corner of Broad St and Third St, just across from where I got off of the bus. On this eastern edge, there is a distinct lack of the skyscrapers that define every other peripheral edge of the Statehouse site. The tallest building on the east is the Columbus Dispatch building (2), as evident by the large advertising sign that tops the structure. Otherwise the gaps between buildings are filled with parking lots, greatly weakening the dense urban core that this center has the potential to be. As with the Arena District, the definition between building density and pedestrian circulation is what creates a comfortable urban atmosphere, and the emptiness of the ground plane created by the parking lots disfigures the urban

environment. The Senate house is the eastern-facing component of the Statehouse complex, and it has a formal, more simplified entrance, close to Third Street, signifying quicker access by car is necessary. On the corner of State Street and Third Street, across from the southeast corner of Capitol Square, there is an old U.S. Post Office building which is grand and historic. There is a prominent juxtaposition between the history and detail of that building and the modern, nondescript skyscraper that houses the Sheraton Hotel on the West side of Third Street. This massive footprint awkwardly meets the corner, its cutout coming back from the street and creating a triangular courtyard space. This is a nice space, though empty on the weekend, which brings down the massive scale of the buildings with a small canopy of trees for comfortable human occupation. From the back of this space you enter an abandoned indoor shopping corridor that meanders through the building, ending in the Columbus Commons, a highly advertised and programmed new green space for Columbus, which is just south of the historic Ohio Theater (3). Walking back towards the Statehouse, the theater is not on axis with the government center (4), a missed opportunity to spatially connect the two historic landmarks.

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 14

Space-Time 3: Historic Columbus [1812-1850] 5

All Photographs by Author (2013)

The echo of the COTA bus announcer comes ringing out of the shell created by the buildings along the west side of High Street. These buildings are impersonal, lacking identity or a relational scale. Though one supports an art gallery, you would never guess by its façade. Capitol Square is disconnected from the river. The higher ground could allow for a vantage point towards the Scioto, but the large setback has allowed for further urban development. I move northward, across High Street from the statehouse, a small pedestrian alleyway tempts me down towards the Scioto River, the first real hint at a grade change towards the river from the otherwise flat city plot. City Hall and judicial buildings are what define the riverʼs edge. Moving back eastwards on Broad Street, the LeVeque tower and the Palace Theater (8) are great landmarks. The Wyandotte Building (9) remains as originally built. The corner of High Street and Broad Street is particularly interesting: On the SE corner is the far-setback Statehouse (6)(11); to the SW, there is small-scale art piece that beckons entry to the historic Huntington Bank building; the NE corner is defined by the modern scrolling text and video playing from the 10TV News headquarters (truly at the heart of Columbus), a small scale building that seems to hint at the lights of New York City; and the NW corner is dominated by a gigantic skyscraper. The southern corners hold history while the northern corners suggest progress and advancement. Moving east on Broad Street, across the street from Capitol Square there is a strange mixture of old low-rise offices cut by blocks and a massive skyscraper that houses state legal offices. Moving further east on Broad Street, there is unique Columbus history, including St. Josephʼs Cathedral (12) and the site of the first Wendyʼs fast food restaurant (13), a strange topic to see on an “Ohio Historical Marker.” I ended my journey with the Columbus Metropolitan Library (14), a trek away from the statehouse.

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 15

Space-Time 3: Historic Columbus [1812-1850] Ultimately, the defining identity of this downtown core is civic/government. This original plan supports Lefebvreʼs (2003) idea of the ‘political cityʼ (9), with Columbus acting as that center. The Statehouse is an object within a void, created by vastly varying density on any given side. Within this urban core, you can tell that Columbus was planned from the beginning for its role as a state capital, as Mumford (2011) solidifies by explaining that “the physical organization of a city, its industries and its markets, its lines of communications and traffic, must be subservient to its social needs” (94). Supporting his claims of subservience to social needs, the main thoroughfares are wide to accommodate large volumes of city visitors. However, in the case of Columbus, these wide streets, usually understood as a distinctive urban organization, there is a great sense of rural space when the city is empty of the traffic. When downtown Columbus does not have occupants, a distinctive rural quality overtakes the downtown atmosphere, with wide open spaces and few pedestrians. On a Sunday, with offices closed, restaurants that rely on professionals buying lunch have no customers to rationalize being open. During my time downtown, the few people I witnessed were either jogging or heading towards the COTA bus terminal on the High St side of Capitol square, both parties heading through downtown, not to it. Downtown Columbus is the epitome of the commuter workplace: It is only alive on the weekdays. On weekends it is a shell of itself, with only light activity in adjacent recreational areas, including the library. The formation of Columbus had a clear rationale, with the necessary “spatial inertia,” as coined by Cox (2012) to be successful (27). How the city of Columbus essentially grew from no prior settlement, it is the epitome of the idea of rural becoming urban by means of human settlement and development, as Marx speaks about in terms of the romantic pastoralism that enchants settlers to settle the sublime and make it civilized (Marx 2000, 85). Ultimately, Columbus can be understood as the urban fabric overtaking nature, supporting Lefebvreʼs (2003) claims that the rural environment always serves as a market to support the urban environment (4).

Photograph by Author (2013)

FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 16

Conclusion Columbus, Ohio is an interesting urban specimen. It is not a quintessential urban environment because it lacks the consistent density of buildings to define the framework and the occupation of people during times when they arenʼt commuting downtown for work. The urban core has been hindered by movements to the suburbs, as they have removed the ‘urban dramaʼ that Mumford (2011) states as so important for maintaining an urban identity (94). However, unlike other cities in the region, Columbus has greatly benefitted by being both an educational center (with The Ohio State University) and a civic center, as the capital of Ohio. The urban center has been unevenly developed, but it has good bones. It has the infrastructure, amenities, and proximity to be very successful. But it will always be fighting against the pastoral American Dream of the suburban lifestyle, having land and a place to ‘escapeʼ from work. Unfortunately for Columbus, this tempting environment all but surrounds the city. In recent times, though, Columbus has undergone

redevelopment patterns that produced such successful communities such as the Arena District, whose organization has made major strides to redefine an urban core and provide amenities that encourage people to visit and, ultimately, move back downtown. Downtown “new urbanism” can also be seen at the Columbus Commons, focusing on multi-use development and having everything within walking distance. Until more than a bus system serves the metropolitan area, further development will be difficult to maintain connections to downtown. Until the city is able to rise above the inundation of cars, it will be unable to thrive as an urban center. Columbus, like Granville, still has many defining attributes that will continue to serve its growth. The problem is that this growth will be realized outside the urban core, which will only continue to feel empty and underutilized until people do more than work there. But there will certainly be driving forces for the investment of such movements to bring people back downtown.

Works Cited “Arena District” (2013). Touring Ohio. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from http://www.touring-ohio.com/central/columbus/arena-district.html Barno, Maggie (2013). Welcome to Granville. Granville Magazine, 2013, 3. “Capital University” (n.d.). Ohio History Central. Retrieved December 1, 2013, from http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Capital_University?rec=2114 “Census shows Columbusʼ growth was uneven” (2011). Draw the Line Midwest. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from http://drawthelinemidwest.org/ohio/census-shows-columbus-growth-was-uneven/ “Columbus History Facts and Timeline” (2013). TravelSmart Ltd: World Guides. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from http://www.world-guides.com/north-america/usa/ohio/columbus/columbus_history.html “Columbus, Ohio” (n.d.). Ohio History Central. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Columbus# “Columbus, Ohio” (2012). Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease. Retrieved October 27, 2013 from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108501.html Cox, Kevin (2012) “Human Geography.” n.p. (draft manuscript) “Easton Town Center” (2011). Steiner + Associates. Retrieved October 27, 2013 from http://www.steiner.com/Projects/EastonTownCenter.aspx Fishman, Robert (2011) “Beyond Suburbia: The Rise of the Technoburb”, The City Reader, edited by Richard T. LeGates and Frederic Stout, 75-83. New York: Routledge. “Highway Chronicle” (2013). Franklin County Engineerʼs Office. Retrieved October 27, 2013 from http://www.franklincountyengineer.org/franklin_county_highway_chronicle.htm “Invisible Fences for Humans” (2009). American Dirt. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from http://dirtamericana.blogspot.com/2009/12/invisible-fences-forhumans-part-i.html Lefebvre, Henri (2003) “From the City to Urban Society”, The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press. Mackinder, Sir Halford John (1907) “Economic Geography”, Britain and the British Seas, 329-340. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Marx, Leo (2000). “The Garden”, The Machine in the Garden, 73-144. New York: Oxford University Press. Mumford, Lewis (2011) “What Is a City?” The City Reader, edited by Richard T. LeGates and Frederic Stout, 92-95. New York: Routledge. FINAL INVESTIGATION | JOSHUA BAUMAN | LA 5630 | BENNETT | AU 13 | 17