btabacchi

Just an update. If you haven't already seen or heard the news, Mayor Coleman has come out in opposition to Cooper Park. Coleman, Ginther, SCA Take Stance on Cooper Park The controversial racetrack redevelopment project proposed for the old Cooper Stadium site has just gained another opponent. Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman issued a statement today about his unhappiness with the current state of the project. “While I support the prospect of new jobs on the West Side and renewed activity at Cooper Stadium, the developer has not done enough to satisfy the noise concerns of the surrounding neighborhoods, particularly Franklinton,” said Coleman. Last week, the Cooper Park Complex gained unanimous approval by the Southwest Area Commission, taking it one step closer to reality. “This proposal has received support from the Southwest Area Commission, and it is my understanding that the developer is working hard to earn Franklinton’s support as well,” continued Coleman. “However, until the developer does more to address the noise issue and receives significant support within the Franklinton community, I must withhold my support for this proposed redevelopment of Cooper Stadium.” Ongoing discussion and debate on the Cooper Park Complex can be found on the Columbus Underground Messageboard. More information about the redevelopment proposal can be found online at http://www.CooperParkComplex.com. ———————————————- Below is the official response from the Southwest Civic Association: “We are disappointed by the statement released today from the Mayor’s office. It appears the mayor has dismissed the value of the opinion of residents and businesses in the Southwest Area of Columbus. We have communicated our support clearly, and our support is much, much more than a unanimous vote for the project. We have invested nearly three years of time studying all the potential impacts of this development on the community at large. The leaders on our commission volunteered their time and performed in-depth due diligence, particularly on the noise issue. We held two lengthy community meetings to hear presentations by two acoustical sound consultants. After further research, we concluded that the acoustical consultants’ suggestion for two absorptive sound walls using state-of-the art materials will protect the residents and businesses in both the Southwest and Franklinton communities. We don’t understand why the Mayor believes our community’s opinion is less important than that of Franklinton. Although we respect the vote taken by the Franklinton Area Commission, we believe it does not represent the opinions of the majority of residents, as demonstrated by those in attendance at meetings over the past three years. The Southwest Area Commission’s opinion should be given just as much creditability since this proposed development site is in the Southwest Area, adheres to the Southwest Area Plan and impacts the residents of this area equally to those residents of Franklinton. It is unfortunate that statements like this pit one community against another instead of working to unify area residents and provide an opportunity for long term positive growth and development in a part of Columbus that has not received a significant amount of attention from City leaders in recent years. Although the Mayor did not attend the two acoustical consultants’ presentations, we assume he has read the reports. We therefore ask what he would recommend in addition to the recommendations made by the acoustical expert? We also assume the mayor has read the Good Neighbor Agreement, a legally enforceable contract, which provides for much stricter penalties than the city’s own noise ordinance. What would he recommend be added to this agreement? We believe the developer has demonstrated his commitment to doing this project in a beneficial manner consistent with the Southwest Area Plan. We look forward to meeting with the Mayor to discuss this project and our commitment to improve our community. We hope that once he understands the communities’ desires, our good neighbor agreement and the noise mitigation measures being undertaken by the developer he will support this project. ” Stefanie Coe President, Southwest Civic Association ———————————————- Below is the official response from City Council President Andrew Ginther: “The Cooper Park concept is an exciting proposal that has the potential to bring jobs, economic development and educational opportunities to Columbus. We look forward to the chance to hear from all sides when City Council takes up the issue and follows the established process for considering rezoning applications, a process which includes public input. We encourage the developer and neighborhood leaders to continue to work together to find a workable solution that addresses the concerns of area residents, charts a path for redevelopment and puts people to work in Franklinton.” President Andrew J. Ginther Columbus City Council Not sure if the responses will make the Dispatch tomorrow - it will be interesting to see if they do. Be aware that the Mayor has no official vote regarding the zoning application, but obviously is trying to pacify someone. Bruno link to the story: http://www.columbusunderground.com/mayor-coleman-takes-stance-against-cooper-park

I hear you on the updates and will try to get word out ASAP. Again, for the moment please try to help spread the word regarding the Online Petition on CooperTalk. We are also reaching out to the BMX community as they are planning to create an Olympic Trials BMX racing venue at the site. Thanks again, Bruno http://www.coopertalk.com

No doubt that the unanimous vote was a positive step towards Columbus gaining this venue. As for the meeting itself, opponents and proponents were each permitted 1/2 hour to make their case. The commissioners were definitely focused on the jobs and opportunity for business development associated with the project. If actual facts are looked at, this thing is a no-brainier to nth degree. Thanks for those who showed - the opposition (lots of GV - downtown real estate types) appeared to outnumber the good guys, but it's pretty hard to beat the benefits of this project with cries of a ruined downtown real estate market and worries that birds won't want to stop in Columbus on their way from Canada to the Caribbean. I'll be sure to pass on word of the City Council meeting(s) as soon as I find out the details. Again, there will be a plea to for the automobile community to band together again to make our voice heard. The fight went right tonight, but it's not over yet. Again, thanks to those who made it out. Bruno http://www.coopertalk.com PS - if you haven't done so, don't forget to sign the Online Petition supporting the project. Go here - Cooper Online Petition.

Just a final reminder encouraging your attendance and support at this meeting meeting. If you go, my understanding is that the meeting room may be filled quickly, so early arrival is suggested. Please feel free to forward, facebook, and or twitter this info to friends and family. Columbus Development Commission - Public Hearing Room 757 Carolyn Avenue Columbus, OH 43224 According to my map it is on the East side of I-71, a few blocks North of E. North Broadway. E. North Broadway is exit #114 on I-71. Go East a couple blocks to Maize Rd. Turn Left on Maize Rd. Turn Left on Carolyn Ave (.5mi). It looks like 757 is almost all the way to the end. Thanks again, Bruno Tabacchi http://www.coopertalk.com

As someone else mentioned, this would be a private development. No doubt that the developer will request a limited tax abatement - who doesn't nowadays - but otherwise it's all private investment. The opponents are suggesting a Verticle Farm instead. A vertical farm uses hydroponics (water instead of soil) to grow veggies. They have no money, but have mentioned public funding and get all gaga over Obama dollars. That would be a minimum of $100 million, but likely much more, just to kick it off. Then at least $80,000 per, per acre in annual lighting expense alone to provide water grown tomatoes. Here's the info: http://www.verticalskygardens.com/ They know that it's an unfeasible option, but it's what they promote as an alternative to prevent Cooper Park. In regards to improving the community, the developer is also establishing a fund that will contribute money directly to the Southwest Civic Association. Those funds will used to better the nearby neighborhoods as well as provide educational opportunities to area kids. Arshot has committed to 25K to start, adds .50 for every ticket sold, and any fines for city code noise violations will add addition money to the pot. The people fighting this are primarily downtown real estate groups, along with a few commissioners from Franklinton, who are worried that they may lose HUD funding that they feel will transform Franklinton into the next Short North. Oh yeah, the Dispatch and TV10 seem to constantly focus on the opponents. Just like the Casino, why would they want anything that potentially takes entertainment dollars away from their Arena District? While this won't make the Dispatch, it's known that certain people invest HUD gimme-some-of-that government-money into dirt cheap, beat up, Franklinton homes and flip them. It's speculated that the real concern is that positive investment and development in the area may lead to higher home values, even in Franklinton. Of course that may mean the free HUD ride might go away. Evidence of this will likely be in the news tomorrow. (take note that the Dispatch/TV10 has failed to report on the unanimous vote to support Cooper Park from the Southwest Area Commission) Tonight the Franklinton Board of Commissioners should vote whether to support or oppose the project. Considering that the lead commissioner is a ROAR founder and several others are members, it's a given that they will oppose the project. So in effect they will be voting to oppose a huge privately-funded jobs, business, education, entertainment project that not only save a historic building, but cleans up a very visible Columbus eyesore. The project provides tax revenue to the city, as well as the above mentioned benefits that would go directly into their own community. Again, if Cooper Park is something you support, your body and voice are needed at the Columbus Development Commission meeting Thursday evening. Bring family and friends.

Great! Hope you can make it. Can you bring the CarsandCoffee crowd?

Unfortunately, I don't think they monitor or react to their website or emails any longer. Their website hasn't been updated since last May. However, many ROAR members seem to hang out on the ColumbusUnderground.com website. Here is a link to the latest Cooper topic. Don't hesitate to sign up and join the fun. http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/cooper-stadium-racetrack-proposal-news-038-updates/page/17?quote=354787#postform

Cooper Park Update: On Thursday evening this week a public meeting will be held at the Columbus Development Commission. This commission makes recommendations to the Columbus City Council and will be very critical in the ultimate decision to approve the project. If you would like to see this project move forward, your help is needed to demonstrate support at this meeting. Meeting starts at 6pm - Plan to arrive early if possible! Thursday, Feb. 10 Columbus Development Commission - Public Hearing Room 757 Carolyn Avenue Columbus, OH 43224----> Google map here ---> http://goo.gl/maps/bTnV ROARColumbus is circulating messages with the intent to crowd the room with opponents. Here is an email message being sent out by Regina Tobin, and as usual, it contains typical ROAR misinformation: Hi All. After 3 years of working on this controversial project of the Cooper Stadium redevelopment plans the time has come for us to show our force in numbers. This coming Thursday is the zoning hearing. This is a very important hearing. We need to have a "standing room" only crowd. It is critical the members of zoning see the turnout of people opposed to the site being turned into a motorsports complex. Recently Green Lawn Cemetery hired an local Columbus Acoustical consultant to replicate the noise level the developer said will be audible with the two 35 foot proposed noise walls. The outside noise levels were so loud the people assembled for the demonstration had to yell at each other to be heard over the noise. The developer's people were in attendance and confirmed the noise levels were accurate on their sound meters. Needless to say they were uncomfortable with the demonstration. You do not have to speak at the hearing. Your presence alone will speak loud enough. Please come and show your support in opposing this ridiculous plan for our downtown neighborhoods. The meeting starts at 6:00 PM, address: 757 Carolyn Ave. Columbus OH 43224 Google Map link http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=757+carolyn+avenue,+col type in the remainder of the address and it will provide the exact location with driving directions. Any questions please contact Regina . Thanks for all of your support over the last 3 long years. Please pass this along to others you know are opposed to this project. Let's finish the job! Regina The only developer representatives in attendance were a video guy and PR person. Neither were "uncomfortable" with the demonstration and reported that people they spoke with felt that the sounds would not be a problem. Here are the comments of the Southwest Area Commissioners that were at the sound test: Unfinished Business: S. Coe indicated that no email questions or concerns were received regarding CoopeStadium. S. Coe also indicated that R. Horn, C. Noble, R. Miller and S. Coe attended a demonstration of the potential noise at Cooper Stadium. R. Miller indicated that the noise was audible but it was not disruptive. R. Horn indicatethat the pre sound meeting took place in the Chapel. When the sound began R. Horn indicated that you could not hearthe sound at the Chapel. He indicated that even near the source of the sound it was not very loud. R. Horn indicate that he spoke with a woman at the trailer park and she indicated that she did not hear anything. C. Noble indicated she was able to have a phone conversation without interruption while the 85decible sound was playing. J. Waltke indicated that S. Coe called him at work and he could hear her clearly and it really just sounded like she was driving in her car. Obviously ROAR is going to continue saying whatever they want to mislead people and prevent this development. If you want this project to happen, your support at this meeting is needed, and requested. A "show of force" by the automotive community would be very effective. If you can, please forward or post this information to other forums/communities to help make them aware of the meeting. If you have any questions, or would like to know more about how you could help the grassroots effort, please send me a PM. Thanks, Bruno Tabacchi http://www.coopertalk.com

This is righter - a twin V8 Yugo! http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/YugoFrEng.jpg http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/YugoRrEng.jpg http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/YugoSide.jpg

Here are a couple interesting reads regarding the issue. http://www.usccracing.com/news_2010/COMMERCIAL_VEHICLE_REGULATIONS.pdf http://www.motorists.org/other/dot-numbering

Looks more like Mustang hell to me. Kinda cool though.

I like the beach photo, but there are a zillion of those. I think the couple in the stream photo is creative and unusual, making it more memorable, which should be a goal of any marketing piece. Is the beach photo another one of yours Tractor? As for the technical quality, you guys obviously know photography, but my untrained eyes can't tell the difference. How about a picture frame around the beach photo? (I know the alignment is off, just playing around here) http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/BeachCard.jpg

That's probably why your driving a Porsche and I just have a crappy old pickemup truck....

It's all yours if you want it. I sent a pdf to the email on the card.

No, I think it's just the way the font looks. That's a long address to run across a vertical format but this photo he did screams cool, and I don't think it would work well in a horizontal format. The phone number has a black outline which might look better in a brown. http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/PhotobyEvan4.jpg

I was just working on the correct name spelling - my wife took pleasure in pointing that out. IMO the full name is important on his personal business card. If he were to use this for copy in a print ad then I would leave it off. It can go either way. I think a silver ink for the text would look pretty cool also. Here's one with the right name. http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/PhotobyEvan3.jpg

Agreed. How about this? I shaded the bottom portion to try and make the text more bold. http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/PhotobyEvan2pdf.jpg

If you like it the way it is then (I think...) all you need to do is copy the pdf file I had sent in the PM and send it off to a printer. If there is something you would want changed let me know and I may be able to do it. I'm not a graphics guy, but I like to fiddle around with the basic programs just for the fun of it sometimes.

Maybe something like this? I like the vertical format. Although the text doesn't pop out at you, the photo does and IMO that's what counts for your business. http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll252/pylnrcr/PhotobyEvanpdf.jpg I couldn't use the logo file as is, but I tried to simulate the three letters as close as I could. BTW - before you go the Vistaprint route I use a small printing business called RedRabbit in Urbana for our business cards. (I have a small landscaping service) I simply send them a pdf file and a day or two later they have the cards ready. Last time we bought some we got 1000 full color cards (one side) for just under $90. The quality is very high. Before that I used Vistaprint and got tired of the non-stop junk mail they send. If you want I'll send you they're contact info.

The Public Utilities Commission (PUCO) has revised its rules relative to motor carrier transportation safety. The new rules apply to businesses that use vehicles with a gross vehicle weight (GVW), gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) or gross combination weight rating (GCWR) of 10,001 to 26,000 pounds to transport property or passengers on a not‐for‐hire basis within Ohio. Previously, vehicles of this size were not covered by safety rules. Individuals transporting personal items that are not in furtherance of a commercial enterprise will not be subject to the new rules. Seems like this includes just about anything that weighs more than 10K. Truck or truck/trailer combined. It's that last line that I think could be open for interpretation by the truckin' police.

Basically, it sounds like the 26K rules will now be applied to 10K and up.

I think you are right. The Dispatch had an article today where a Buck and Sons landscaping guy was pulled over and given a warning. Could be all kinds of scenarios though - how about these guys that pull a tournament fishing boat that has the sponsor logos all over it? I also wonder about guys that use their commercial trucks to pull a private race trailer on the weekend?

^^^ agree. Why not use one of the photos from your site? The one of the couple in the stream is pretty cool. Just ad your logo/contact info in a contrasting white on the dark part of the picture. The picture on the card will speak volumes. Heck, PM that pic file with your logo and I'll throw an idea at you just for the fun of it. (Sorry for the double post - I wanted to add the last part)

.. double post - sorry ..

Just a heads up to those that tow a trailer. Beginning Jan. 1, 2011 PUCO has new "safety" rules that effect vehicles/trailers weighing between 10,001 and 26,000 pounds. My understanding is that even private vehicles that display sponsor logos may come under the new rules. http://www.puco.ohio.gov/emplibrary/files/media/Publications/Fact_Sheets/new%20safety%20rules%20for%20private%20intrastate%20vehicles.pdf